Raytheon Company  is a major American military contractor   and industrial corporation with core manufacturing concentrations in   weapons and military and commercial electronics. It was previously   involved in corporate and special-mission aircraft until early 2007.   Raytheon is the world's largest producer of guided missiles.[2]
Established  in 1922, the company  reincorporated in 1928 and adopted its present  name in 1959. The  company has around 72,000 employees worldwide and  annual revenues of  approximately US$25 billion. More
 than 90% of  Raytheon's revenues were  obtained from military contracts and, as of  2007, it was the  fifth-largest military contractor in the world,[3] and is the fourth largest defense contractor in the United States by revenue.
 than 90% of  Raytheon's revenues were  obtained from military contracts and, as of  2007, it was the  fifth-largest military contractor in the world,[3] and is the fourth largest defense contractor in the United States by revenue.
Raytheon Headquarters was moved from Lexington, Massachusetts to Waltham, Massachusetts on October 27, 2003.[4]   The company was previously headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts   from 1922–1928, Newton, Massachusetts from 1928–1941, Waltham from   1941–1961, Lexington from 1961–2003, and back to Waltham from 2003   onwards.
Early years
In  1922, two former Tufts engineering  college roommates Laurence K.  Marshall and Vannevar Bush, along with  scientist Charles G. Smith,  founded the American Appliance Company in  Cambridge, Massachusetts.[5]   Its focus, which was originally on new refrigeration technology, soon   shifted to electronics. The company's first product was a gaseous (helium) rectifier that was based on Charles Smith's earlier astronomical research of the star Zeta Puppis.[6] The electron tube was christened with the name Raytheon ("light of/from the gods"[7]) and was used in a battery eliminator, a type of radio-receiver power supply that plugged into the power grid   in place of large batteries. This made it possible to convert  household  alternating current to direct current for radios and thus  eliminate the  need for expensive, short-lived batteries.
In 1925, the company changed its name to Raytheon Manufacturing Company and began marketing its rectifier, under the Raytheon   brand name, with great commercial success. In 1928 Raytheon merged  with  Q.R.S. Company, an American manufacturer of electron tubes and   switches, to form the successor of the same previous name, Raytheon   Manufacturing Company. In 1933 it diversified by acquiring Acme-Delta   Company, a producer of transformers, power equipment, and electronic auto parts. By the 1930s, it had already grown to become one of the world's largest vacuum tube manufacturing companies.
During WWII
Early in World War II, physicists in the United Kingdom invented the magnetron, a specialized microwave-generating electron tube that markedly improved the capability of radar to detect enemy planes. American companies were then sought by the U.S. government to perfect and mass-produce   the magnetron for ground-based, airborne, and shipborne radar systems,   and, with support from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's   Radiation Laboratory (recently formed to investigate microwave radar),   Raytheon received a contract to build the devices. Within a few months   of being awarded the contract, Raytheon had already begun to mass   manufacture magnetron tubes for use in radar sets and then complete radar systems.   At war's end in 1945 the company was responsible for about 80 percent   of all magnetrons manufactured. During the war Raytheon also pioneered   the production of shipboard radar systems, particularly for submarine   detection.
Raytheon's research on the magnetron tube revealed the potential of microwaves   to cook food. In 1945, Raytheon's Percy Spencer invented the microwave   oven by discovering that the magnetron could rapidly heat food. In  1947,  the company demonstrated the Radarange microwave oven for  commercial  use.
After WWII
In  1945, the company expanded its  electronics capability through  acquisitions that included the Submarine  Signal Company (founded in  1901), a leading manufacturer of maritime  safety equipment. With its  broadened capabilities, Raytheon developed  the first guidance system for  a missile that could intercept a flying  target. In 1948, Raytheon began  to manufacture guided missiles.  In  1950, its Lark missile became the first such weapon to destroy a  target  aircraft in flight. Raytheon then received military contracts to  develop  the air-to-air Sparrow and ground-to-air Hawk missiles —  projects that  received impetus from the Korean War. In later decades,  it remained a  major producer of missiles, among them the Patriot antimissile missile and the air-to-air Phoenix missile.   In 1959, Raytheon acquired the marine electronics company Apelco   Applied Electronics, which significantly increased its strength in   commercial marine navigation and radio gear, as well as less-expensive   Japanese suppliers of products such as marine/weather band radios and   direction-finding gear. In the same year, it changed its name to Raytheon Company.
During  the post-war years, Raytheon also  made radio and television  transmitters and related equipment for the  commercial market in the U.S.  and got into the educational publishing business with the acquisition of D.C. Heath. In the 1950s, Raytheon began manufacturing transistors, including the CK722, priced and marketed to hobbyists.
In  1961, the British electronics company  A.C. Cossor merged with Raytheon,  following its sale by Philips. The  new Company's name was Raytheon  Cossor. The Cossor side of the  organisation is still current in the  Raytheon group as of 2009.
In 1965, it acquired Amana Refrigeration, Inc., a manufacturer of refrigerators and air conditioners.   Using the Amana brand name and its distribution channels, Raytheon   began selling the first countertop household microwave oven in 1967 and   became a dominant manufacturer in the microwave oven business.
The 1980s
In 1980, Raytheon acquired Beech Aircraft Corporation, a leading manufacturer of general aviation aircraft founded in 1932 by Walter H. Beech.   In 1993 the company expanded its aircraft activities by adding the   Hawker line of business jets by acquiring Corporate Jets Inc., the   business jet product line of British Aerospace (now BAE Systems). These   two entities were merged in 1994 to become the Raytheon Aircraft   Company. In the first quarter of 2007 Raytheon sold its aircraft   operations, which is now operating as Hawker Beechcraft. The product   line of Raytheon's aircraft subsidiary included business jets such as   the Hawker 800XP and Hawker 4000, the Beechjet 400A, and the Premier I;   the popular King Air series of twin turboprops; and piston-engine   aircraft such as the Bonanza. Its special-mission aircraft included the   single-turboprop T-6A Texan II, which had been chosen to be the primary training aircraft for the United States Air Force and United States Navy.
The 1990s
In 1991, during the Persian Gulf War, Raytheon's Patriot missile   received great international exposure, resulting in a substantial   increase in sales for the company outside the United States. In an   effort to establish leadership in the defense electronics business,   Raytheon purchased in quick succession Dallas-based E-Systems (1995), Chrysler Corporation's   defense electronics and aircraft-modification businesses (1996)   (portions of these businesses were later sold to L-3 Communications),   and the defense unit of Texas Instruments - Defense Systems & Electronics Group (1997). Also in 1997, Raytheon acquired the aerospace and defense business of Hughes Aircraft Company from Hughes Electronics Corporation   — a subsidiary of General Motors, which included a number of product   lines previously purchased by Hughes Electronics including the former   General Dynamics missile business, the defense portion of Delco   Electronics (Delco Systems Operations), and Magnavox Electronic Systems.[citation needed]
Raytheon also divested itself of several nondefense businesses in the 1990s, including Amana Refrigeration. On October 12, 1999 Raytheon exited the personal rapid transit (PRT) business as it terminated its PRT 2000[8] system due to high-cost of development and lack of interest.[9] The PRT 2000 prototype now sits idle at their Marlboro, Massachusetts facility.[10]
--------------------------------------------
 Raytheon-ELSI S.p.A. (ELSI),   an Italian corporation wholly owned by the United States corporations   Raytheon Company (Raytheon), which held 99.16 per cent of the shares,   and its subsidiary The Machlett Laboratories (Machlett), which held the   remaining 0.83 per cent, was established in Palermo, Italy, where it   produced electronic components.  
ELSI had been in economic trouble since  the 1960s. In 1967,  representatives of ELSI and Raytheon held numerous  meetings with  officials of the Italian Government and of the Sicilian  region in an  attempt to secure governmental support for ELSI. When it  became apparent  that these discussions were unlikely to be successful,  Raytheon  prepared to close the plant. The balance sheet for the end of  September  1967 showed that under Italian law and accounting principles  the book  value of ELSI's assets still exceeded its liabilities.  However, internal  accounting adjustments in accordance with Rayhteon's  accounting policy  showed ELSI insolvent. Raytheon therefore formally  declared that it  would not subscribe to any additional loans made to  ELSI. It was,  however, ready to financially support an orderly  liquidation. The  Italian authorities pressed ELSI not to close the  plant and promised  help. The final decision to close the plant was  taken in March 1968.
On April 1, 1968, the Mayor of Palermo  issued an order, effective  immediately, requisitioning ELSI's plant and  related assets for six  months. An administrative appeal brought  against the order was not  decided by the Prefect of Palermo until  August 22, 1969. It was then  held that the Mayor had exceeded his  powers and that the requisition had  been unlawful. In the meantime, the  plant had been occupied and  production had ceased. On April 26, 1968,  ELSI filed petition in  bankruptcy. A trustee was appointed. In July  1969, ELSI was purchased  for far less than book value by a subsidiary  of the State-controlled  IRI. An action for damages resulting from the  requisition was dismissed  by the Court of Palermo. On appeal, the Court  of Appeal of Palermo  granted a small portion of the claims. This  decision was upheld by the  Court of Cassation in 1975. In 1974, the  United States transmitted a  note to Italy enclosing a claim on behalf  of Raytheon, based on several  alleged violations of the Treaty of  Friendship, Commerce and Navigation  concluded between Italy and the  United States (FCN Treaty).
The United States application before the  International Court of Justice  was filed in 1987. According to the  wishes of the parties, the case was  submitted to and decided by a  Chamber of the Court under Article 26(2)  of the Statute of the Court.
Italy entered an objection to the  admissibility of the present case on  the ground of an alleged failure  of the two United States corporations  to exhaust local remedies. The  United States questioned whether the rule  of the exhaustion of local  remedies could apply at all, as Article XXVI  of the FCN Treaty was  unqualified by any reference to the local  remedies rule. The United  States further argued that the local remedies  rule was inapplicable in  so far as its claim was for a declaratory  judgment of a direct injury  to the United States by infringement of its  rights under the FCN  Treaty. The Chamber rejected these arguments. The  United States also  observed that Italy, until the filing of the  Counter-Memorial, had at  no time suggested that Raytheon should sue in  the Italian courts on the  basis of the Treaty, and argued that this  amounted to an estoppel. The  Chamber, however, found that an estoppel  cannot be derived from a mere  failure to mention a matter at a  particular point in diplomatic  exchanges.
After examining the actions taken against  the requisition order, the  Chamber considered that the municipal  courts had been fully seized of  the matter which was the substance of  the Applicant's claim before the  Chamber. Furthermore, since it was for  Italy to show the existence of a  local remedy, and since Italy had not  been able to satisfy the Chamber  that there clearly remained some  remedy which Raytheon, independently of  ELSI, ought to have pursued and  exhausted, the Chamber rejected the  objection of non-exhaustion of  local remedies.
As to the merits, the majority found that  it had not been sufficiently  established that an orderly liquidation  of ELSI's assets would still  have been feasible at the time of the  requisition. The Chamber first  observed that Article III of the Treaty,  the right "to control and  manage corporations", had not been violated,  since it had not been  established that the creditors would have given  the company enough time  for an orderly liquidation, or that the price  obtainable on a quick sale  would have been sufficient. The Chamber felt  that since the feasibility  of an orderly liquidation had not been  sufficiently established, the  requisition order could not interfere  with control and management in any  real sense. Thus the requisition,  while unlawful, was not the cause of  ELSI's bankruptcy.
The  Chamber also dismissed the claim that  Article V, paragraphs 1 and 3, of  the FCN Treaty, which were concerned  with the protection and security of  nationals and their property, had  been violated. According to the  Chamber the toleration of the  occupation of the plant by the workers did  not cause any material harm  to ELSI. The delay in the administrative  appeal was not regarded as a  denial of justice, since, under the Italian  Law, there had been a means  of requesting a quick decision.
The judgment further found that no taking  without a due process of law  had occurred contrary to Article V,  paragraph 2, of the Treaty. The  Chamber left the question open, whether  the Italian term  "espropriazione" should be interpreted in a stricter  sense than the  English term "taking". In that respect, the Chamber  found that although a  requisition could be an expropriation, it was not  in the present case,  since ELSI was already under an obligation to  file for bankruptcy.
The Chamber also concluded that the  requisition order had not violated  Article I of the Supplementary  Agreement to the FCN Treaty, which  prohibited "arbitrary or  discriminatory measures". According to the  Chamber arbitrariness would  require more than mere unlawfulness. But  since the order was  "consciously made in the context of an operating  system of law and of  appropriate remedies of appeal", it could hardly be  an arbitrary act.  Finally, the Chamber stated that the right to dispose  of property and  interests, guaranteed by Article VII of the FCN Treaty,  had not been  violated, since what really deprived the United States  shareholders of  their right to dispose of ELSI's real property was the  precarious  financial state of ELSI, which ultimately led to bankruptcy  and thus  prevented the shareholders from disposing of the company's  property.
Having thus found  that the Respondent,  Italy, had not violated the FCN Treaty in the  manner asserted by the  Applicant, it follows that the Chamber rejected  the claim for  reparation made by the Applicant.


No comments:
Post a Comment
The most important thing to remember about the Comment Rules is this:
The determination of whether any comment is in compliance is at the sole discretion of this blog’s owner.
Comments on this blog may be blocked or deleted at any time.
Fair people are getting fair reply. Spam and useless crap and filthy comments / scrapers / observations goes all directly to My Private HELL without even appearing in public !!!
The fact that a comment is permitted in no way constitutes an endorsement of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment by the administrator of this site.
This means that there may be a delay between the submission and the eventual appearance of your comment.
Requiring blog comments to obey well-defined rules does not infringe on the free speech of commenters.
Resisting the tide of post-modernity may be difficult, but I will attempt it anyway.
Your choice.........Live or DIE.
That indeed is where your liberty lies.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.