SEATTLE Bigger profits or bragging rights?
The Boeing Co. may see neither as prime contractor on the troubled space station program.
Like other big defense contractors, Boeing wants to blunt the impact of lower military spending, partly by branching into other peacetime applications of its aerospace technology.
So at first blush, the government's decision to award Boeing the space station contract Tuesday looked like a big victory for the company, which has faced the additional problem of weakened demand for its commercial aircraft.
But the contract isn't a true example of defense conversion, since the main customer is still the government, not a mass audience of consumers. The most Boeing won in the contract may be lower short-range losses and better long-range opportunities. The impact on jobs appears to be minimal.
''It's a blip because of the nature of the program,'' said Jerrold Lundquist, a partner at the management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. in Stamford, Conn.. ''Given the fragility of that program, I wouldn't necessarily uncork the champagne.''
Two months ago a move to shoot down the space station failed by one vote in the House, and opponents are sure to try again, said Jim Raffel, a research analyst at the National Commission for Economic Conversion and Disarmament in Washington.
''It's always endangered,'' agreed Anthony Marolda, president of The Winbridge Group, a defense consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass.
Nor can anyone say whether the contract will pay as much as Boeing would have gotten as a major supplier before the Clinton administration ordered a program overhaul. ''It's very difficult for me to answer that question,'' said John Winch, vice president in charge of the space station at Boeing Defense and Space Group.
In a telephone interview from Huntsville, Ala., where most of Boeing's work on space station components is done, Winch said he hoped managing the $22 billion program would make up for cuts in hardware appropriations.