There’s nothing to see here, folks, just Boeing possibly giving a million bucks to someone encouraging people to drive around the country, who also happens to be the regulator overseeing the certification of new aircraft.
In this post:
The economics & pitch deck of Sean Duffy’s road trip
Several days ago, I covered how United States Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy launched the “Great American Road Trip” series, whereby he and his family went on a road trip over the course of parts of seven months.
This is intended to be in celebration of the United States’ 250th birthday, and the concept behind this was “to love America is to see America.” Duffy also made this political, suggesting that “for decades our kids have been told they should be ashamed of our country & founders,” and he suggests the road trip is intended to “push back on those Marxist narratives.”
Some people are criticizing Duffy for taking the time for this road trip while in office. Personally, I don’t necessarily have an issue with that, since it’s not like he was filming this nonstop. However, what I do have an issue with is how this is being funded. Duffy is proudly exclaiming that no taxpayer dollars were used for this, and that it was funded through donations.
Well, those donations are largely coming from companies that Duffy is responsible for regulating, ranging from Boeing, to Toyota, to United Airlines.
So, what exactly was the pitch here, and how much are these companies paying? Politico’s Daniel Lippman has some interesting insights:
- There’s the pitch deck for sponsors, with four different partner levels — $1 million, $500K, $250K, or $100K — and each tier comes with different levels of recognition and networking opportunities (it’s not clear if those were the prices that ended up being paid)
- Then there’s the strategy overview, which hints at an initially broader vision for the series, including that it would have 10 episodes, and would have a major streaming partner; this also reveals the target audience, which includes “married moms (ages 28–54) with children,” “empty Nesters (aged 50-70), married with grown children and/or grandchildren,” and “patriotic Singles & Couples (ages 25–45) who are travel enthusiasts” (don’t ask me to explain the capitalization choices)
It’s all a fascinating read, so I’d highly recommend taking a look at those two documents, if you’re interested.
It’s also worth pointing out that the person running the non-profit that’s behind this show was previously a lobbyist for the US Travel Association, and before that, worked in government relations at General Motors.
Does anyone NOT see a conflict of interest here?
I know stuff is highly politically polarized. For some people, Trump can do no right, while for other people, Trump can do no wrong.
But let’s step back for a moment, and remove the individuals. If you’d like, pretend it was actually previous Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg doing this. Does anyone not think there’s a major conflict of interest when the person responsible for regulating the travel and transportation industry is seeking to fund a show that he’s the star of by accepting donations from the companies he’s supposed to oversee?
Literally what’s being pitched in exchange for a million bucks is “up to 6 VIP invitations to receptions, roundtables, or networking events.” Nice, spend enough money, and you get to “network” with the regulators!
The most concerning example here is Boeing:
- Why is Boeing sponsoring a series about a road trip?
- Boeing doesn’t even sell products directly to consumers
So it makes you wonder, does Boeing want to be one of the biggest sponsors because it thinks it’s good publicity, or because its entire business trajectory is based around getting aircraft certified by regulators, including the 777-9 and 737 MAX 10?
Seriously, does anyone not take issue with that? All of the sponsors in the transportation industry bother me, but Boeing as one of the primary sponsors, especially when the cozy relationship between the government and Boeing contributed to two fatal Boeing 737 MAX crashes several years back, really rubs me the wrong way.
Bottom line
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is proudly exclaiming how his “Great American Road Trip” isn’t funded by taxpayers. Instead, it’s funded largely by the companies he’s supposed to regulate, including Boeing. Yes, that Boeing, the one that had the two fatal 737 MAX crashes, which were largely blamed on there being too cozy of a relationship between regulators and the aircraft manufacturer.
Nothing to see here, folks…
Since when does any politician ever pay for anything ? All politicians depart much richer than when they boarded the flight . King Farouk , for example .
Most people in Washington DC grift. And it's both parties. If they're getting something tangible done then it can be chalked up to the cost of doing business. But DC gets nothing done. It can't even do the most basic of functions like keep the public safe. We descend into a third world.
I've spent my entire career working for Fortune 500 companies. Each company required it's employees to perform annual Ethics training that clearly spelled out what we could and could not do. And it also included specific information on dealing with government agencies. I sincerely doubt that what these "corporate sponsors" are doing with the DOT would be in the spirit of the ethics training we received. This is just another example of when the rules...
I've spent my entire career working for Fortune 500 companies. Each company required it's employees to perform annual Ethics training that clearly spelled out what we could and could not do. And it also included specific information on dealing with government agencies. I sincerely doubt that what these "corporate sponsors" are doing with the DOT would be in the spirit of the ethics training we received. This is just another example of when the rules do not apply to specific people.
I'll be offended when the unions and NGOs stop contributing to the government officials that create policies that benefit them but are detrimental to the public i.e. the teachers unions homeless industrial complex, big education etc. Both sides do it. It's been that way for decades. At least this is private money that is being expended and not tax payer funded donations to politicians.
It's just another day in the most corrupt maladministration in the history of the USA. Everything about the fat orange Nazi is predicated on greed, self-enrichment, and harming the citizenry of the country; the effluvia of his mid-stage dementia and bottomless greed flows downhill from the Trump crime family (a RICO organization if ever there was one) to his unqualified cabinet, all with their hands in the till, to the right-wing activist "Supreme" Court "justices"...
It's just another day in the most corrupt maladministration in the history of the USA. Everything about the fat orange Nazi is predicated on greed, self-enrichment, and harming the citizenry of the country; the effluvia of his mid-stage dementia and bottomless greed flows downhill from the Trump crime family (a RICO organization if ever there was one) to his unqualified cabinet, all with their hands in the till, to the right-wing activist "Supreme" Court "justices" captured by bribes and special interests.
Shackles were invented for these kinds of people, and they'll be wearing them in two-and-a-half years, if not sooner. They should enjoy the looting while they can.
Sec. Duffy accuses the “radical, miserable left” of finding his production “too wholesome,” “too patriotic,” and “too joyful.” Oof, I wish this big, bad, mythical boogeyman ‘left’ existed, but sadly it does not in the USA. If they did, they’d actually enforce the rules against such corruption, rather than just being a weak group of corporate Democrats who merely act as a controlled opposition.
A Trump cabinet official abusing his position to personally enrich himself (or in this case get free vacations for himself and his family)? I am shocked. Shocked I say!
There's the final question as to why this should cost so much. If you exclude the large secret service bill this isn't a series that should take a significant sum of money to produce.
The usual business model for a producer is to raise funds and then make the movie/TV series with the difference between the budget and actual production costs (plus some money from the actual viewership) being the profit margin. The question...
There's the final question as to why this should cost so much. If you exclude the large secret service bill this isn't a series that should take a significant sum of money to produce.
The usual business model for a producer is to raise funds and then make the movie/TV series with the difference between the budget and actual production costs (plus some money from the actual viewership) being the profit margin. The question here is who owns the production company and what happens to those excess funds
Ben, are you surprised? Donald Trump and his cabinet are all a bunch of grifters. As long as they're in power, they'll enrich themselves by robbing the federal government and the people blind, while accepting bribes from their sycophants. This is just a tiny, tiny example.
And this is indeed just a "tiny" example. Imagine the "big" ones.