
Raytheon Company is a major United States defense contractor based in Waltham, Massachusetts. At least 80 percent of Raytheon's revenues are obtained from contracts with the United States government. It is the second largest military contractor in the world. William H. Swanson is the Chairman and CEO. Richard Armitage, United States Deputy Secretary of State, is linked to the company by consultancy work. ==History== Two former college roommates Laurence K. Marshall and Vannevar Bush, along with scientist Charles G. Smith, founded the American Appliance Company in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1922. The company's first product was a gaseous rectifier, called the ''Raytheon'' ("light of the gods") and used for radio-receiver Power supply that plugged into the power grid in place of large Battery (electricity). The company changed its name to Raytheon in 1925. In World War II Raytheon manufactured magnetron tubes for use in radar sets, and then complete radar systems. (In 1945 Raytheon's Percy Spencer invented the microwave oven by discovering that the magnetron could also cook food.) In 1948 Raytheon began to manufacture guided missiles. In 1997 Raytheon acquired the defense business of Hughes Aircraft from General Motors, adding many important military products to its portfolio. This included the General Dynamics missile business, added to Hughes by GM. ==Contemporary products== BGM-109_Tomahawk_cruise_missile_by_Raytheon">Image:Tomahawk_cruise_missile.jpg|thumb|300px|A BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missile by Raytheon Missiles still form a large part of Raytheon's business as of 2004, including: *AGM-129 ACM Cruise Missile *AGM-65 Maverick *AIM-9 Sidewinder *AGM-88 HARM *MIM-104 Patriot *AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon Raytheon also manufactures semiconductors for the electronics industry. In the late 20th century it produced a wide range of integrated circuits and other components, but as of 2003 its semiconductor business specializes in gallium arsenide components for radio communications. It also makes several software radio and digital communication systems for military applications such as Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), is participating in Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI), ECHELON and the Joint Tactical Terminal (JTT) programs. Civilian lines of business include corporation jet aircraft. In the 1990s Raytheon tried to build a Personal rapid transit system called PRT2000 but didn't win any contracts. The system is still in use at their headquarters. In the framework of Ground-Based Missile Defense, Raytheon develops a Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) which includes a booster missile and a /Projectile#Explosive_charge_or_kinetic Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV). ==Controversies and Litigation== ===Illegal obtention of classified information in a bidding process=== In March 1990, Raytheon pleaded guilty to one felony count of illegally obtaining classified United States Air Force budget and planning documents. [http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_action=doc&p_theme=current&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=BGBK&p_text_direct-0=document_id=(%200EADDEC48E840460%20)&p_nbid=E63A49ODMTA4NjA1NTkzMi43MTg5MzI6MTo2OmJvc3Rvbg&] U.S. District Judge Albert V. Bryan,Jr. imposed a US dollar10,000 criminal fine for one felony count of "conveyance without authority" and $900,000 in civil penalties and damages. The documents allegedly gave Raytheon an unfair advantage against its competitors in bidding for weapons contracts. Although the plea only involved 1983 Air Force documents, United States Attorney Henry Hudson said Raytheon also illegally obtained a wide range of secret The Pentagon documents. ===Disputed claims about the Patriot missile=== During the 1991 Gulf War, Raytheon received widespread publicity in the United States in connection with its manufacture of the Patriot Missile (MIM-104 Patriot). The Patriot Missile is an anti-ballistic missile which had allegedly intercepted Scud Missiles launched by Iraq in its defense against the U.S. led invasion. When President George H. W. Bush traveled to Raytheon's Patriot manufacturing plant in Andover, Massachusetts during the Gulf War, he declared, the ""Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted!" [http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/papers/1991/91021504.html] After the Gulf War had concluded, the staff of the House Government Operations Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security reported, "The Patriot missile system was not the spectacular success in the Persian Gulf War that the American public was led to believe. There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War, and there are some doubts about even these engagements. The public and the Congress were misled by definitive statements of success issued by administration and Raytheon representatives during and after the war." [http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/docops/operate.htm] ===AGES Lawsuit=== In 1996 a corporation called AGES Group filed suit against Raytheon in federal court in Alabama over a $450 million contract to service C-12 and U-21 military aircraft. [http://www.citizenslaw.net/_cases/vi_v_raytheon/Ages_v_Raytheon_Burr.htm], [http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_action=doc&p_theme=current&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=BGBK&p_text_direct-0=document_id=(%200EADDDA99ECF46BD%20)&p_nbid=E78P5EAYMTA4NjA1NzI3NC44ODQ4NDY6MTo2OmJvc3Rvbg&] The Boston Herald reported that AGES alleged that the security firm Wackenhut, hired by Raytheon, used video and audio surveillance to spy on a consulting firm hired by AGES to help it prepare its bid. AGES also alleged that stolen confidential pricing documents were turned over to Raytheon. Both Raytheon and AGES had been vying for the contract, which Raytheon had held for decades but which AGES won in 1996. On May 12, 1999, Reuters reported that Raytheon would pay $3 million to AGES Group and purchase $13 million worth of AGES aircraft parts to settle AGES lawsuit. The settlement was exceptional in that the parties agreed that judgment would be entered against Raytheon, legally establishing the validity of AGES' allegations. ===Contract Disputes=== Raytheon frequently has been involved in contract disputes with the United States Government. In October of 1994, Raytheon paid $4 million to settle a U.S. government claim that it inflated a defense contract for antimissile radar. The PAVE PAWS system was designed to detect incoming submarine-launched ballistic missiles. PAVE PAWS stands for Precision Acquisition Vehicle Entry Phased Array Warning System. The government claimed in a federal lawsuit that Raytheon inflated a contract to upgrade two of four PAVE PAWS sites by proposing to hire higher-skilled employees than were necessary for the job. Just one year earlier, on October 14, 1993, Raytheon paid $3.7 million to settle allegations that it misled the Defense Department by overstating the labor costs involved in manufacturing Patriot missiles. "The recovery of this money is yet another warning to contractors that the Truth in Negotiations Act's information disclosure requirements will be strictly and sternly enforced," Frank Hunger, assistant Attorney General, said in a statement. ===Brazilian (SIVAM) Controversy=== Allegations of bribery were made against Raytheon in 1995 in connection with its efforts to win a 1.4 billion dollar radar contract from Brazil for the SIVAM project. [http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_action=doc&p_theme=current&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=BGBK&p_text_direct-0=document_id=(%200EADE18FE984E756%20)&p_nbid=I6BQ51DLMTA4NjA1NjY5MS45MDUwMDE6MTo2OmJvc3Rvbg&] SIVAM, the acronym for "System for Vigilance over the Amazon," is a complex radar surveillance system for use monitoring the Amazon rainforest, allegedly to curb the trafficking of illegal drugs and to curb illegal logging or burning of the forest. Brazilian police wiretapped a telephone conversation between a special advisor to the Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, and Raytheon's operative in Brazil, Jose Afonso Assumpcão. According to transcripts published in the Brazilian Weekly ''Isto É (magazine)'', when Assumpcão told Gomes dos Santos that Brazilian Senator Gilberto Miranda might block the Raytheon contract, Gomes dos Santos responded, "Damn, did you already pay this guy?" Gomes dos Santos and Brazil's aviation minister resigned because of allegations that this conversation suggested that bribes were paid. Nonetheless, Raytheon ultimately was awarded the contract after lobbying by the administration of U.S. President Bill Clinton. ===Securities Litigation=== In October of 1999, Raytheon was the subject of a number of securities class action lawsuits alleging it had issued a series of materially false and misleading statements including overstating the Company's 1997 and 1998 revenues, concealing cost overruns and inflating its financial results. The suits were brought in response to a massive drop in value of Raytheon's common stock as traded on the New York Stock Exchange. On Tuesday, October 12, 1999, Raytheon shares were trading at about 45% below the level at which they had been traded on October 11, 1999. The plunge in stock prices was triggered by a Wall Street Journal report that Raytheon was over cost or behind schedule on more than a dozen fixed-price defense contracts. This crash represented a loss of about $8 billion in market value in a single day. On May 13, 2004 Raytheon reported that it had reached a preliminary agreement to pay $410 million in cash and securities to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging it misled investors by not disclosing difficulties on various Pentagon and construction projects five years before. ==See also== * Aerospace manufacturer * :Category:Raytheon products ==External links== * [http://www.raytheon.com/ Raytheon Company website] ** [http://www.raytheon.com/about/static/node3563.html/ Raytheon Business Ethics and Compliance Home Page] * CorpWatch [http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=13 Raytheon profile] Raytheon Fortune 500 companies
Raytheon once manufactured televisions and marketed them under the Belmont brand name, is that right? So my parents once said... (Deleted 207.136.9.114 's vulgar complaint about what a Raytheon is.) Raytheon was a brand name of rectifier tube created by the Early founders of Raytheon AS it stated in the article. User:Dominick 18:51, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC) ---- The company's web page http://www.raytheon.com/about/ gives the name as Raytheon Company (not Corporation); move page to "Company"? : Why not just Raytheon? User:Edward 10:09, 23 May 2004 (UTC) ::Most Employees just use Raytheon. After the consolidations, many different flavors of Raython were used such as Raytheon Electronics Systems, Raytheon Systems Corp. Now most just say Raytheon officially, AFAIK no other entities exist.User:Dominick 14:46, 23 May 2004 (UTC) == Chain edits with one sided Raytheon Criticism == Numerous chain edits on the page were done from a single activist source. I looked at PoV for most, perhaps this should be a boilerplate corporate page, and then add the comments and controversy where they belong. Many removed comments have little to do with Raytheon, others are unsubstantiated. If there is better than a single source for those comment please post here and lets make this a better article.User:Dominick 14:58, 23 May 2004 (UTC) Indeed, most of the article sounds like a long indictment of Raytheon. I'm in no position to say whether what's said is true or not; however, it is a bit bizarre to focus on the scandals and hardly say anything about the history of products from that company. My impression is that anyway all major companies, especially those dealing with government procurement, have had similar scandals. User:David.Monniaux 15:13, 23 May 2004 (UTC) :Good restructrure job. I will look for a good source on product lines, and add more. I think that someone read an expose. Most was previous management. Raytheon is a leader in having a high level and high profile Ethics office. User:Dominick 02:39, 24 May 2004 (UTC) Chain editing with one sided comments are out of hand. What to do... User:Dominick 02:39, 25 May 2004 (UTC) This is Whit Larrabee here. I apologize for the chain edits. I am just learning how to do this. Some of the source information for this article came from the Multinational Monitor which may be found at www.corpwatch.org under Raytheon Profile. The Bush speech at Andover is found at Bush, George. "Exchange with Reporters in Andover, Massachusetts, on the Iraqi Offer to Withdraw from Kuwait." Public Papers of the Presidents: Administration of George Bush. 15 February 1991. Washington: GPO: 147-148. ---. "Remarks to Raytheon Missile Systems Plant Employees in Andover, Massachusetts." Public Papers of the Presidents: Administration of George Bush. 15 February 1991. Washington: GPO: 148-150. http://www.pitt.edu/~gordonm/JPubs/PatriotQJS.html I don't believe that the inclusion of negative comments about raytheon violates the no point of view policy. I have attempted to remove editorial comments and just report the facts. When I came upon the article, it was imbalanced in that it said nothing of this company's misdeeds. More balance would be added if more information were added. The negative information, if truthful, should not be removed just because it is negative. If the facts are as I have stated them, they are not "one sided." The facts are the facts. The truth has no sides. However, I encourage people to add balance to the artice by incorporating favorable information about Raytheon's accomplishments. I have a high degree of confidence in the facts presented. Some of the other information I have incorporated in the article is sourced at http://www.gis.net/~larrabee/raytheonprofile.htm. I will return with more evidence of sources User:Whitfield Larrabee 01:05, 26 May 2004 (UTC) The Bush speech can be found at: http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/papers/1991/91021504.html "Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted. And given the fact that this Scud missile has no military value, simply designed to devastate cities and wipe out population, imagine what course this war would have taken without the Patriot." User:Whitfield Larrabee 01:56, 26 May 2004 (UTC) Reference to Raytheon's criminal conviction can be found at: http://www.law.emory.edu/1circuit/jan97/96-1430.01a.html What could be more relevant to an article about a corporation than its conviction of a crime in the core activities of the corporations enterprise, defense contracting? With regard to the SIVAM scandal, the exact quote from the wiretap was deleted by someone. One can imply from the quoted material that bribes were paid. The publication Isto E "this is" for those who don't speak portuguese, is cited. By deleting the factual information from the article and then complaining that it isn't "sourced," the reader is left without enough information to make up his mind. I recommend returning the quote of the wiretap to the article to allow the reader to make up his or her mind. I recommend deleting term Scandals. Scandals suggests a point of view. Whether something is a scandal depends on your perspective. The "negative events" in Raytheon's history should be under history. The securities fraud happened under the "new management" of Daniel Burnham, who recently was replaced. It is one of the top ten securities fraud settlements in the history of the world. I agree that Raytheon is a leader in having a high level of ethics and high profile Ethics office --- in comparison to Enron, Worldcom, Global Crossing and Health South. I agree that the word "Corporation" should be deleted from the page title. No one who knows the company calls it that. It should be Raytheon or Raytheon Company. It is important to explain that Bush declared that the Patriot was over 95% successful to put into context later findings that it was at best 40% successful and possibly as low as 0% successful in hitting Scuds. That is the core of the factual dispute. User:Whitfield Larrabee 01:56, 26 May 2004 (UTC) With regard to the SIVAM scandal, the sources for that claim can be found at http://www.gis.net/~larrabee/Brazil.htm This report is based on reports in Boston Globe, The LA Times and Associated Press. Here is corroborating source for the quote I incorporated in the SIVAM article yesterday. The transcript details conversation regarding the SIVAM project, specifically the frustration that Assumpção felt with Senator Gilberto Miranda who had been stalling the implementation of the project. The Ambassador's response, as published is Isto É, is "Why? You have already paid him off". http://www.brazil-brasil.com/p16jan96.htm This translation is slightly different. I would tend to go with the quote I used 6 years ago based on research in respected US papers. Further discussion of the bribery scandal, corroborating deleted post: http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/mm1096.05.html http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11107 Michael S Serill, "Hello, how about a bribe?", Time, 11 December 1995; Jan Rocha, "Scandalous threat to image of new Brazil", Guardian (UK), 29 December 1995 User:Whitfield Larrabee 02:59, 26 May 2004 (UTC) :To make this read more like other pages of other companies, Lockheed Martin Halliburton. I am speaking up because even the Halliburton page is more NPoV than this one! I think we should have some sub pages, the top page being boilerplate, and the extensive lists of products, locations, details, scandals, and officers on subpages to this. Anyone interested can look there. To include loads of negative information in a profile and not any nuetral or postive information makes the POV negative. Raytheon isnt a criminal enterprise, and the overall article makes it out to be. The overall article should be NPoV and that includes how you pick facts. You spent a lot of time doing this, lets do it right! This isn't an activist resource, these should be white glove articles with balanced treatment. As far as source data, we should stick to primary sources, and I will look through the articles today. I will split the page in a bit to make the subsections, and if you want to run with the scandal page fine. Please put references in for the scandals with a primary source. I will probably do products in the next few days.User:Dominick 11:29, 26 May 2004 (UTC) Unless someone objects, I am going to move this page to Raytheon Company. Dominick. Rather than breaking up the article, why don't we just add information about the company that you feel would add more balance. The scandalous history of the company makes for more interesting and informative reading. Other corporations don't seem to have subpages for negative information, why should Raytheon? User:Whitfield Larrabee 00:16, 28 May 2004 (UTC) :This page should be at simply "Raytheon". Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). --User:Minesweeper 23:53, May 28, 2004 (UTC) ::It was a pointless move but it is a fait accompli. I guess my going out of town is a problem. "The scandalous history of the company makes for more interesting and informative reading. Other corporations don't seem to have subpages for negative information, why should Raytheon" Because the other company pages dont have 90% of the information on the page negative. I think your PoV is showing. This is a hack job article as it sits now. The scandals and such as you list have no balancing PoV. I am going to split this to provide for a boilerplate top page, perhaps a detailed products, locations and history page, then your history of scandals. Competitor pages are not this big. SO far no one else objected to a split. Obviously the point you want is a negative PoV Raytheon Article, not a NPoV Raytheon Article. User:Dominick 20:30, 30 May 2004 (UTC) The proposed formatting change might be objectionable and might violate the no point of view policy if it highlighted certain information and de-emphasised other important information. If it is just a matter of inserting lines in the page breaking up the page, as appears to have been done, then I see no problem. A number of companies with controversial pasts have lengthy profiles -Enron and Halliburton, for example. The difficulty in satisfying the critique that the controversies and litigation section is "imbalanced" and violates the no point of view policy is that I am not aware of any positive information that would counterbalance the truthful negative information, except possibly the fact that Raytheon maintains an ethics office. I will information about Raytheon's Ethics Office to this section. For example, recent evidence that Raytheon committed securities fraud and defrauded its investors by hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. How can this be counterbalanced by positive information. Has Raytheon set up a foundation giving away hundreds of millions of dollars in repentence for its misdeeds. When Raytheon was convicted of committing a felony, did it set up a group to prevent corporations from committing crimes in the future. User:Whitfield Larrabee 23:53, 31 May 2004 (UTC) =Whitfield Larrabee= This troubles me a lot. I wonder how to approach this. A lawyer specializing in Raytheon http://www.gis.net/~larrabee/raytheonwatch.htm lawsuits and litigation posts here. I don't know how to pursue this. My father says, "People don't get mad for free, they have to pay to be mad". Are there any wikipedians who like to take a crack at an approach to this?User:Dominick 10:39, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC) == Ad Hominem Criticism == ad hom·i·nem ''adj.'' Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: ''Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.'' ''Ad hominem attacks on one's opponent are a tried-and-true strategy for people who have a case that is weak.'' As long as the information is accurate in a writing, the position occupied by the person making the argument should make no difference. For example, a lawyer who has investigated a corporation over a period of years might be in a better position than a person randomly selected from the streets to comment on the activities of that corporation. There could be an argument made that the lawyer had a conflict of interest if the lawyers writings stood to benefit the lawyer financially. The same could be said of an employee of a corporation. An employee might have a conflict of interest if the employee recieves financial remuneration from the corporation who is the subject of the article. Whitfield Larrabee does not have any conflict of interest because he is not presently pursuing any claims against Raytheon. User:Whitfield Larrabee 16:18, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC) :You have a conflict of interest. This isnt a forum for activism, this is a place to create a reference work. User:Dominick 21:35, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Defence companies Manufacturing companies of the United States U.S. aircraft manufacturers Companies traded on NYSE Companies based in Massachusetts
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Raytheon:
Raytheon
Raytheon
Raytheon
Raytheon_ATFLIR
Raytheon_Beechcraft_Baron
Raytheon_Co.
Raytheon_Company
Raytheon_Corporation
Raytheon_Corporation
Raytheon_Hawker_1000
Raytheon_Hawker_800
Raytheon_Missile_Systems
Raytheon_products
Raytheon_Sentinel
Raytheon
Raytheon Company is a major United States defense contractor based in Waltham, Massachusetts. At least 80 percent of Raytheon's revenues are obtained from contracts with the United States government. It is the second largest military contractor in the world. William H. Swanson is the Chairman and CEO. Richard Armitage, United States Deputy Secretary of State, is linked to the company by consultancy work. ==History== Two former college roommates Laurence K. Marshall and Vannevar Bush, along with scientist Charles G. Smith, founded the American Appliance Company in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1922. The company's first product was a gaseous rectifier, called the ''Raytheon'' ("light of the gods") and used for radio-receiver Power supply that plugged into the power grid in place of large Battery (electricity). The company changed its name to Raytheon in 1925. In World War II Raytheon manufactured magnetron tubes for use in radar sets, and then complete radar systems. (In 1945 Raytheon's Percy Spencer invented the microwave oven by discovering that the magnetron could also cook food.) In 1948 Raytheon began to manufacture guided missiles. In 1997 Raytheon acquired the defense business of Hughes Aircraft from General Motors, adding many important military products to its portfolio. This included the General Dynamics missile business, added to Hughes by GM. ==Contemporary products== BGM-109_Tomahawk_cruise_missile_by_Raytheon">Image:Tomahawk_cruise_missile.jpg|thumb|300px|A BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missile by Raytheon Missiles still form a large part of Raytheon's business as of 2004, including: *AGM-129 ACM Cruise Missile *AGM-65 Maverick *AIM-9 Sidewinder *AGM-88 HARM *MIM-104 Patriot *AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon Raytheon also manufactures semiconductors for the electronics industry. In the late 20th century it produced a wide range of integrated circuits and other components, but as of 2003 its semiconductor business specializes in gallium arsenide components for radio communications. It also makes several software radio and digital communication systems for military applications such as Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), is participating in Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI), ECHELON and the Joint Tactical Terminal (JTT) programs. Civilian lines of business include corporation jet aircraft. In the 1990s Raytheon tried to build a Personal rapid transit system called PRT2000 but didn't win any contracts. The system is still in use at their headquarters. In the framework of Ground-Based Missile Defense, Raytheon develops a Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) which includes a booster missile and a /Projectile#Explosive_charge_or_kinetic Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV). ==Controversies and Litigation== ===Illegal obtention of classified information in a bidding process=== In March 1990, Raytheon pleaded guilty to one felony count of illegally obtaining classified United States Air Force budget and planning documents. [http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_action=doc&p_theme=current&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=BGBK&p_text_direct-0=document_id=(%200EADDEC48E840460%20)&p_nbid=E63A49ODMTA4NjA1NTkzMi43MTg5MzI6MTo2OmJvc3Rvbg&] U.S. District Judge Albert V. Bryan,Jr. imposed a US dollar10,000 criminal fine for one felony count of "conveyance without authority" and $900,000 in civil penalties and damages. The documents allegedly gave Raytheon an unfair advantage against its competitors in bidding for weapons contracts. Although the plea only involved 1983 Air Force documents, United States Attorney Henry Hudson said Raytheon also illegally obtained a wide range of secret The Pentagon documents. ===Disputed claims about the Patriot missile=== During the 1991 Gulf War, Raytheon received widespread publicity in the United States in connection with its manufacture of the Patriot Missile (MIM-104 Patriot). The Patriot Missile is an anti-ballistic missile which had allegedly intercepted Scud Missiles launched by Iraq in its defense against the U.S. led invasion. When President George H. W. Bush traveled to Raytheon's Patriot manufacturing plant in Andover, Massachusetts during the Gulf War, he declared, the ""Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted!" [http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/papers/1991/91021504.html] After the Gulf War had concluded, the staff of the House Government Operations Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security reported, "The Patriot missile system was not the spectacular success in the Persian Gulf War that the American public was led to believe. There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War, and there are some doubts about even these engagements. The public and the Congress were misled by definitive statements of success issued by administration and Raytheon representatives during and after the war." [http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/docops/operate.htm] ===AGES Lawsuit=== In 1996 a corporation called AGES Group filed suit against Raytheon in federal court in Alabama over a $450 million contract to service C-12 and U-21 military aircraft. [http://www.citizenslaw.net/_cases/vi_v_raytheon/Ages_v_Raytheon_Burr.htm], [http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_action=doc&p_theme=current&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=BGBK&p_text_direct-0=document_id=(%200EADDDA99ECF46BD%20)&p_nbid=E78P5EAYMTA4NjA1NzI3NC44ODQ4NDY6MTo2OmJvc3Rvbg&] The Boston Herald reported that AGES alleged that the security firm Wackenhut, hired by Raytheon, used video and audio surveillance to spy on a consulting firm hired by AGES to help it prepare its bid. AGES also alleged that stolen confidential pricing documents were turned over to Raytheon. Both Raytheon and AGES had been vying for the contract, which Raytheon had held for decades but which AGES won in 1996. On May 12, 1999, Reuters reported that Raytheon would pay $3 million to AGES Group and purchase $13 million worth of AGES aircraft parts to settle AGES lawsuit. The settlement was exceptional in that the parties agreed that judgment would be entered against Raytheon, legally establishing the validity of AGES' allegations. ===Contract Disputes=== Raytheon frequently has been involved in contract disputes with the United States Government. In October of 1994, Raytheon paid $4 million to settle a U.S. government claim that it inflated a defense contract for antimissile radar. The PAVE PAWS system was designed to detect incoming submarine-launched ballistic missiles. PAVE PAWS stands for Precision Acquisition Vehicle Entry Phased Array Warning System. The government claimed in a federal lawsuit that Raytheon inflated a contract to upgrade two of four PAVE PAWS sites by proposing to hire higher-skilled employees than were necessary for the job. Just one year earlier, on October 14, 1993, Raytheon paid $3.7 million to settle allegations that it misled the Defense Department by overstating the labor costs involved in manufacturing Patriot missiles. "The recovery of this money is yet another warning to contractors that the Truth in Negotiations Act's information disclosure requirements will be strictly and sternly enforced," Frank Hunger, assistant Attorney General, said in a statement. ===Brazilian (SIVAM) Controversy=== Allegations of bribery were made against Raytheon in 1995 in connection with its efforts to win a 1.4 billion dollar radar contract from Brazil for the SIVAM project. [http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_action=doc&p_theme=current&p_topdoc=1&p_docnum=1&p_sort=YMD_date:D&p_product=BGBK&p_text_direct-0=document_id=(%200EADE18FE984E756%20)&p_nbid=I6BQ51DLMTA4NjA1NjY5MS45MDUwMDE6MTo2OmJvc3Rvbg&] SIVAM, the acronym for "System for Vigilance over the Amazon," is a complex radar surveillance system for use monitoring the Amazon rainforest, allegedly to curb the trafficking of illegal drugs and to curb illegal logging or burning of the forest. Brazilian police wiretapped a telephone conversation between a special advisor to the Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, and Raytheon's operative in Brazil, Jose Afonso Assumpcão. According to transcripts published in the Brazilian Weekly ''Isto É (magazine)'', when Assumpcão told Gomes dos Santos that Brazilian Senator Gilberto Miranda might block the Raytheon contract, Gomes dos Santos responded, "Damn, did you already pay this guy?" Gomes dos Santos and Brazil's aviation minister resigned because of allegations that this conversation suggested that bribes were paid. Nonetheless, Raytheon ultimately was awarded the contract after lobbying by the administration of U.S. President Bill Clinton. ===Securities Litigation=== In October of 1999, Raytheon was the subject of a number of securities class action lawsuits alleging it had issued a series of materially false and misleading statements including overstating the Company's 1997 and 1998 revenues, concealing cost overruns and inflating its financial results. The suits were brought in response to a massive drop in value of Raytheon's common stock as traded on the New York Stock Exchange. On Tuesday, October 12, 1999, Raytheon shares were trading at about 45% below the level at which they had been traded on October 11, 1999. The plunge in stock prices was triggered by a Wall Street Journal report that Raytheon was over cost or behind schedule on more than a dozen fixed-price defense contracts. This crash represented a loss of about $8 billion in market value in a single day. On May 13, 2004 Raytheon reported that it had reached a preliminary agreement to pay $410 million in cash and securities to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging it misled investors by not disclosing difficulties on various Pentagon and construction projects five years before. ==See also== * Aerospace manufacturer * :Category:Raytheon products ==External links== * [http://www.raytheon.com/ Raytheon Company website] ** [http://www.raytheon.com/about/static/node3563.html/ Raytheon Business Ethics and Compliance Home Page] * CorpWatch [http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=13 Raytheon profile] Raytheon Fortune 500 companies
Raytheon
Raytheon once manufactured televisions and marketed them under the Belmont brand name, is that right? So my parents once said... (Deleted 207.136.9.114 's vulgar complaint about what a Raytheon is.) Raytheon was a brand name of rectifier tube created by the Early founders of Raytheon AS it stated in the article. User:Dominick 18:51, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC) ---- The company's web page http://www.raytheon.com/about/ gives the name as Raytheon Company (not Corporation); move page to "Company"? : Why not just Raytheon? User:Edward 10:09, 23 May 2004 (UTC) ::Most Employees just use Raytheon. After the consolidations, many different flavors of Raython were used such as Raytheon Electronics Systems, Raytheon Systems Corp. Now most just say Raytheon officially, AFAIK no other entities exist.User:Dominick 14:46, 23 May 2004 (UTC) == Chain edits with one sided Raytheon Criticism == Numerous chain edits on the page were done from a single activist source. I looked at PoV for most, perhaps this should be a boilerplate corporate page, and then add the comments and controversy where they belong. Many removed comments have little to do with Raytheon, others are unsubstantiated. If there is better than a single source for those comment please post here and lets make this a better article.User:Dominick 14:58, 23 May 2004 (UTC) Indeed, most of the article sounds like a long indictment of Raytheon. I'm in no position to say whether what's said is true or not; however, it is a bit bizarre to focus on the scandals and hardly say anything about the history of products from that company. My impression is that anyway all major companies, especially those dealing with government procurement, have had similar scandals. User:David.Monniaux 15:13, 23 May 2004 (UTC) :Good restructrure job. I will look for a good source on product lines, and add more. I think that someone read an expose. Most was previous management. Raytheon is a leader in having a high level and high profile Ethics office. User:Dominick 02:39, 24 May 2004 (UTC) Chain editing with one sided comments are out of hand. What to do... User:Dominick 02:39, 25 May 2004 (UTC) This is Whit Larrabee here. I apologize for the chain edits. I am just learning how to do this. Some of the source information for this article came from the Multinational Monitor which may be found at www.corpwatch.org under Raytheon Profile. The Bush speech at Andover is found at Bush, George. "Exchange with Reporters in Andover, Massachusetts, on the Iraqi Offer to Withdraw from Kuwait." Public Papers of the Presidents: Administration of George Bush. 15 February 1991. Washington: GPO: 147-148. ---. "Remarks to Raytheon Missile Systems Plant Employees in Andover, Massachusetts." Public Papers of the Presidents: Administration of George Bush. 15 February 1991. Washington: GPO: 148-150. http://www.pitt.edu/~gordonm/JPubs/PatriotQJS.html I don't believe that the inclusion of negative comments about raytheon violates the no point of view policy. I have attempted to remove editorial comments and just report the facts. When I came upon the article, it was imbalanced in that it said nothing of this company's misdeeds. More balance would be added if more information were added. The negative information, if truthful, should not be removed just because it is negative. If the facts are as I have stated them, they are not "one sided." The facts are the facts. The truth has no sides. However, I encourage people to add balance to the artice by incorporating favorable information about Raytheon's accomplishments. I have a high degree of confidence in the facts presented. Some of the other information I have incorporated in the article is sourced at http://www.gis.net/~larrabee/raytheonprofile.htm. I will return with more evidence of sources User:Whitfield Larrabee 01:05, 26 May 2004 (UTC) The Bush speech can be found at: http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/papers/1991/91021504.html "Patriot is 41 for 42: 42 Scuds engaged, 41 intercepted. And given the fact that this Scud missile has no military value, simply designed to devastate cities and wipe out population, imagine what course this war would have taken without the Patriot." User:Whitfield Larrabee 01:56, 26 May 2004 (UTC) Reference to Raytheon's criminal conviction can be found at: http://www.law.emory.edu/1circuit/jan97/96-1430.01a.html What could be more relevant to an article about a corporation than its conviction of a crime in the core activities of the corporations enterprise, defense contracting? With regard to the SIVAM scandal, the exact quote from the wiretap was deleted by someone. One can imply from the quoted material that bribes were paid. The publication Isto E "this is" for those who don't speak portuguese, is cited. By deleting the factual information from the article and then complaining that it isn't "sourced," the reader is left without enough information to make up his mind. I recommend returning the quote of the wiretap to the article to allow the reader to make up his or her mind. I recommend deleting term Scandals. Scandals suggests a point of view. Whether something is a scandal depends on your perspective. The "negative events" in Raytheon's history should be under history. The securities fraud happened under the "new management" of Daniel Burnham, who recently was replaced. It is one of the top ten securities fraud settlements in the history of the world. I agree that Raytheon is a leader in having a high level of ethics and high profile Ethics office --- in comparison to Enron, Worldcom, Global Crossing and Health South. I agree that the word "Corporation" should be deleted from the page title. No one who knows the company calls it that. It should be Raytheon or Raytheon Company. It is important to explain that Bush declared that the Patriot was over 95% successful to put into context later findings that it was at best 40% successful and possibly as low as 0% successful in hitting Scuds. That is the core of the factual dispute. User:Whitfield Larrabee 01:56, 26 May 2004 (UTC) With regard to the SIVAM scandal, the sources for that claim can be found at http://www.gis.net/~larrabee/Brazil.htm This report is based on reports in Boston Globe, The LA Times and Associated Press. Here is corroborating source for the quote I incorporated in the SIVAM article yesterday. The transcript details conversation regarding the SIVAM project, specifically the frustration that Assumpção felt with Senator Gilberto Miranda who had been stalling the implementation of the project. The Ambassador's response, as published is Isto É, is "Why? You have already paid him off". http://www.brazil-brasil.com/p16jan96.htm This translation is slightly different. I would tend to go with the quote I used 6 years ago based on research in respected US papers. Further discussion of the bribery scandal, corroborating deleted post: http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/mm1096.05.html http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11107 Michael S Serill, "Hello, how about a bribe?", Time, 11 December 1995; Jan Rocha, "Scandalous threat to image of new Brazil", Guardian (UK), 29 December 1995 User:Whitfield Larrabee 02:59, 26 May 2004 (UTC) :To make this read more like other pages of other companies, Lockheed Martin Halliburton. I am speaking up because even the Halliburton page is more NPoV than this one! I think we should have some sub pages, the top page being boilerplate, and the extensive lists of products, locations, details, scandals, and officers on subpages to this. Anyone interested can look there. To include loads of negative information in a profile and not any nuetral or postive information makes the POV negative. Raytheon isnt a criminal enterprise, and the overall article makes it out to be. The overall article should be NPoV and that includes how you pick facts. You spent a lot of time doing this, lets do it right! This isn't an activist resource, these should be white glove articles with balanced treatment. As far as source data, we should stick to primary sources, and I will look through the articles today. I will split the page in a bit to make the subsections, and if you want to run with the scandal page fine. Please put references in for the scandals with a primary source. I will probably do products in the next few days.User:Dominick 11:29, 26 May 2004 (UTC) Unless someone objects, I am going to move this page to Raytheon Company. Dominick. Rather than breaking up the article, why don't we just add information about the company that you feel would add more balance. The scandalous history of the company makes for more interesting and informative reading. Other corporations don't seem to have subpages for negative information, why should Raytheon? User:Whitfield Larrabee 00:16, 28 May 2004 (UTC) :This page should be at simply "Raytheon". Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). --User:Minesweeper 23:53, May 28, 2004 (UTC) ::It was a pointless move but it is a fait accompli. I guess my going out of town is a problem. "The scandalous history of the company makes for more interesting and informative reading. Other corporations don't seem to have subpages for negative information, why should Raytheon" Because the other company pages dont have 90% of the information on the page negative. I think your PoV is showing. This is a hack job article as it sits now. The scandals and such as you list have no balancing PoV. I am going to split this to provide for a boilerplate top page, perhaps a detailed products, locations and history page, then your history of scandals. Competitor pages are not this big. SO far no one else objected to a split. Obviously the point you want is a negative PoV Raytheon Article, not a NPoV Raytheon Article. User:Dominick 20:30, 30 May 2004 (UTC) The proposed formatting change might be objectionable and might violate the no point of view policy if it highlighted certain information and de-emphasised other important information. If it is just a matter of inserting lines in the page breaking up the page, as appears to have been done, then I see no problem. A number of companies with controversial pasts have lengthy profiles -Enron and Halliburton, for example. The difficulty in satisfying the critique that the controversies and litigation section is "imbalanced" and violates the no point of view policy is that I am not aware of any positive information that would counterbalance the truthful negative information, except possibly the fact that Raytheon maintains an ethics office. I will information about Raytheon's Ethics Office to this section. For example, recent evidence that Raytheon committed securities fraud and defrauded its investors by hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. How can this be counterbalanced by positive information. Has Raytheon set up a foundation giving away hundreds of millions of dollars in repentence for its misdeeds. When Raytheon was convicted of committing a felony, did it set up a group to prevent corporations from committing crimes in the future. User:Whitfield Larrabee 23:53, 31 May 2004 (UTC) =Whitfield Larrabee= This troubles me a lot. I wonder how to approach this. A lawyer specializing in Raytheon http://www.gis.net/~larrabee/raytheonwatch.htm lawsuits and litigation posts here. I don't know how to pursue this. My father says, "People don't get mad for free, they have to pay to be mad". Are there any wikipedians who like to take a crack at an approach to this?User:Dominick 10:39, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC) == Ad Hominem Criticism == ad hom·i·nem ''adj.'' Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: ''Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.'' ''Ad hominem attacks on one's opponent are a tried-and-true strategy for people who have a case that is weak.'' As long as the information is accurate in a writing, the position occupied by the person making the argument should make no difference. For example, a lawyer who has investigated a corporation over a period of years might be in a better position than a person randomly selected from the streets to comment on the activities of that corporation. There could be an argument made that the lawyer had a conflict of interest if the lawyers writings stood to benefit the lawyer financially. The same could be said of an employee of a corporation. An employee might have a conflict of interest if the employee recieves financial remuneration from the corporation who is the subject of the article. Whitfield Larrabee does not have any conflict of interest because he is not presently pursuing any claims against Raytheon. User:Whitfield Larrabee 16:18, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC) :You have a conflict of interest. This isnt a forum for activism, this is a place to create a reference work. User:Dominick 21:35, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Raytheon
Defence companies Manufacturing companies of the United States U.S. aircraft manufacturers Companies traded on NYSE Companies based in Massachusetts
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
R
RA | RB | RC | RD | RE | RF | RG | RH | RI | RJ | RK | RL | RM | RN | RO | RP | RS | RT | RU | RW | RX | RY | RZ |Words begining with Raytheon:
Raytheon
Raytheon
Raytheon
Raytheon_ATFLIR
Raytheon_Beechcraft_Baron
Raytheon_Co.
Raytheon_Company
Raytheon_Corporation
Raytheon_Corporation
Raytheon_Hawker_1000
Raytheon_Hawker_800
Raytheon_Missile_Systems
Raytheon_products
Raytheon_Sentinel
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
