United Launch Alliance parent organization Boeing
Company history
Formation
Boeing and Lockheed Martin announced their intent to form a 50-50 joint venture on 2 May 2005 aiming to consolidate the manufacture and deployment of US government expendable launch vehicles and launch services. The United Launch Alliance name was announced at the same time. Prior to the creation of the United Launch Alliance and contrary to expectations of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, a strong, competitive commercial launch market did not materialize within the United States. Estimated prices for future contracts and program costs increased, resulting in a Nunn-McCurdy cost breach. There was also considerable turmoil within the United States Air Force (USAF) space community and between the two EELV launch service providers due to competition in the shrinking space launch market, cost increases, and the growing need for reliable access to space. This turmoil culminated in civil and criminal fraud accusations being brought against Boeing relating to the improper use of competitors' information and racketeering.As a result, the United States Department of Defense changed its acquisition strategy to one which would maintain assured access to space. Under the "Buy III" program, all fixed costs were covered by the US government, which brought about a deal between the two major EELV contractors to combine their efforts into a single company. Annual savings were estimated to be US$100-150 million. SpaceX challenged the legality of the launch services monopoly on 23 October 2005 on anti-trust grounds, creating competition with reusable launch systems. The Federal Trade Commission gave ULA anti-trust clearance on 3 October 2006.It was the FTC's opinion that due to the challenge of entering the government medium-to-heavy launch services market, the entry of SpaceX was unlikely to reverse the anti-competitive effects resulting from the formation of ULA, but, it approved the joint venture on the basis that the benefits of assured access to space for national security outweighed anti-competitive harm.The commission required ULA to "cooperate on equivalent terms with all providers of government space vehicles ... provide equal consideration and support to all launch service providers when seeking any U.S. government delivery in orbit contract ... and to safeguard competitively sensitive information obtained from other providers of space vehicles and launch services".
parent company holding company subsidiary owner parent corporation parent entity