Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Billings Gazette)   U.S. Government putting the screws on small companies by giving contracts to big companies pretending to be small   (hosted.ap.org) divider line 34
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

5467 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jul 2006 at 6:19 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



34 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2006-07-26 03:59:06 PM  
Ole Mom and Pop Haliburton
 
2006-07-26 04:06:26 PM  
"Should the firm be penalized for success?" asked Rich Carter, a GOP spokesman for the House Small Business Committee. "Should the agency not be given credit for taking a risk by placing their initial confidence in this small business to perform this type of work? Maybe (Democrats) believe this company should have never received the contract in the first place to satisfy some accounting standard."

Good work, numbnuts. Sidestep the issue and act as if the rules really don't matter that much.

Typical.
 
2006-07-26 05:11:08 PM  
Velazquez is asking the Government Accountability Office and internal watchdogs for the State, Treasury, Defense and Transportation departments to investigate their contracting procedures and see if criminal activity is involved.

Is Government Accountability an oxymoron when the President is a Oxford Yale Moron
 
2006-07-26 06:23:08 PM  
I just have to say that today is the worst headline day ever.
 
2006-07-26 06:25:43 PM  
I thought the bidding process was supposed to get the cheapest price. Why does the size (I assume they mean revenue) of the contractor matter?
 
2006-07-26 06:26:50 PM  
al_quesadilla "I just have to say that today is the worst headline day ever."


.... I think they are trying to be sneaky - read it again.

And then one more time.

See?



... no, neither did I. It's kinda, not that great.

/reads it one more time, still doesn't like it.
 
2006-07-26 06:26:56 PM  
al_quesadilla
I just have to say that today is the worst headline day ever.

Seconded.
 
2006-07-26 06:27:03 PM  
If the thing is sent to bid, who cares if it goes to small big or whatever.

Bottom line is who can deliver the item specified in proper working order for the cheapest.

Thats what I care about as a taxpayer. Sounds like more gov't bueacracies that serve no purpose other than drain my tax dollar.
 
2006-07-26 06:27:42 PM  
SmalMart?
 
2006-07-26 06:28:14 PM  
ChairmanKaga: Ole Mom and Pop Haliburton

Heh, that's what I was thinking. "How the hell can Haliburton pretend to be small..."
 
2006-07-26 06:28:24 PM  
earthhopenetwork.net

/thanks for all the money
//sorry about your kids
 
2006-07-26 06:31:11 PM  
Major Thomb

I thought the bidding process was supposed to get the cheapest price. Why does the size (I assume they mean revenue) of the contractor matter?


You might prefer a large company because they are more likely to be still trading this time next year, and are therefore less likely to embarass you at election time.

You may prefer a small company because you want to keep the business geographically localised (hopefully to leverage into votes.)
 
2006-07-26 06:31:54 PM  
IRS putting the screws to small companies by auditing far more Sub-S corps than in years past...

Why? Because big companies have lawyers and accountants on staff who do nothing but argue with the Feds all the time...

Next time some of you guys whine about Drew selling some advertising, think about all the time and effort that goes into running this happy little operation known as Fark...

/End 'small businessman's' rant...
 
2006-07-26 06:33:53 PM  
Contractors get points based on if they're a small business or if the owner is a woman or a minority.
 
2006-07-26 06:43:28 PM  
That's nothing. They should look into teaming contracts. Millions of dollars to a "Team" Firm with one huge company and a small women owned one. The small firm is supposed to get 60% of the work, but usually they can't hack it and the big firm does it anyway.

I've never understood why a small firm should get a contract over a big one anyway. The big firm will have far greater assets available to better serve the needs of its client than the two engineers with a wife listed as CEO.
 
2006-07-26 06:45:37 PM  
As far as awarding contracts go... I think that that MS contract was for Win2k licenses, the rolls royce contract was for V-22 engines. Don't get me started on the 11B they awarded EDS for the craptastic NMCI. I feel icky.
 
2006-07-26 06:47:15 PM  
ericjohnson0

www.ajsmith.clara.net
 
2006-07-26 07:01:03 PM  
Major Thomb: I thought the bidding process was supposed to get the cheapest price. Why does the size (I assume they mean revenue) of the contractor matter?

That whole lowest price thing is not really true. Yes, it's a big factor, but not true. We just won a govt contract recently and were not the lowest bidder, however, we were in a position to provide much better service than the other company.

With the small business things, there are all kinds of set asides for certain types of businesses: small business, minority owned, woman owned, verteran owned, service desabled veteran owned, whatever. There are rules in place that require certain percentages of contracts to go to various types of businesses, such as small or minority owned ones. Getting certified as one of these types is HUGE because there are always big companies neededing to pick up small ones just for the sake of meeting the x% small business requirement.

So, why are these in place? Well, one big reason is fairness. Yes, the govt actually has rules in place to even the odds of small businesses versus big businesses. For example, if a small business works on a proposal, you may have half the staff dedicating stupid amounts of time to it. If they don't win the thing, that is all money down the drain. Whereas in a big company, they have some much overhead $$, they have dedicated people available to work on the stuff. Just from a resource standpoint it is very difficult for a small business to compete.
 
2006-07-26 07:07:21 PM  
About 10 years ago there was a program where 25% of government purchases had to be from certified small buisnesses. So I worked for a company made up of 4 salespeople and a bookkeeper. The bids were for things like 'Dell computer with xx Specifications". so we would call dell, get a quote, turn around and mark it up for the bid. There were hundreds of companies that existed only to resell dells and gateways on federal bids.

The special set asides basically accomplished nothing, which was why they changed the rules.
 
2006-07-26 07:27:15 PM  
When small business contracts with large companies are excluded, the government missed for a sixth straight year a requirement that 23 percent of its $314 billion in annual contracts go to small businesses, the report said.

How many years has this administration been in power? Oh, yeah, nearly six. Just a coincidence, I'm sure.
 
2006-07-26 07:31:41 PM  
U.S. Government putting the screws on small companies everyone who isn't rich by giving contracts to big companies pretending to be small going about it's regular daily business.

Not so much fixed, since you were correct, just a clarification.
 
2006-07-26 07:34:30 PM  
going about it's regular daily business

*headdesk*

Now I know it's time to go home.

/Checks...
//Yep, got it right that time.
 
2006-07-26 07:35:41 PM  
Big_B: That's nothing. They should look into teaming contracts. Millions of dollars to a "Team" Firm with one huge company and a small women owned one. The small firm is supposed to get 60% of the work, but usually they can't hack it and the big firm does it anyway.

I actually got transferred over to the sub-contractor on one of those. It was a real joke, because it was all the same people doing the work but the name on the check changed.
 
2006-07-26 07:44:05 PM  
They're griping over some small contracts. $15K - $48K isn't exactly huge by govt or biz standards.
 
2006-07-26 07:50:11 PM  
"Should the firm be penalized for success?" asked Rich Carter, a GOP spokesman for the House Small Business Committee. "Should the agency not be given credit for taking a risk by placing their initial confidence in this small business to perform this type of work? Maybe (Democrats) believe this company should have never received the contract in the first place to satisfy some accounting standard."

STFU! Jesus what a schmuck! Yes we need to cry a river of tears because of how much Wal-Mart, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, and Google are suddenly being punished because they were mom and pop shops before the Bush administration! farking wanker
 
2006-07-26 07:52:10 PM  
If they want a real crime they should look at companies who set up "minority owned" spinoffs. My company created a company with the hispanic bimbo that the owner was nailing and companies scramble to do business with us. She's richer than God and the only minority in the company. Nothing like reverse discrimination to make things all right.

\Definition of rich in this country - anyone that makes a dollar more than you
 
2006-07-26 09:01:38 PM  
I think submitter meant "turning the screws" but that still wouldn't make any sense.

I love when people don't know where to properly insert phrases.

/when in Rome
 
2006-07-26 09:12:20 PM  
on a related topic:

does anyone think that the u.s. government taking contracts out of kbr's hands in iraq and selling them around is going to work out well? i can't wait to see the sort of small operators who are willing to risk beheading to defraud the u.s. government *cough* custer battles *cough*.

not that i like kbr - but i find more evidence that they're the ones the government went to on these contracts because they're willing to risk life and limb of their employees for relatively low returns thanks to their buddy-buddy relationship with the government, not because they see iraq as a magical money machine.
 
2006-07-26 09:59:27 PM  
Plenty of experience dealing with 8a (minority owned) contracts. They usually get the "prime" acceptance of their soliticitation and then add a large corporation as the subcontractor (almost always a 51-49 split). Big corporations commonly subcontractors to many contracts won by either 8a or small business firms-- and therefore they remain veryl large and very profitable corporations solely through many subcontracts to 8a firms, not necissarily to the government.

As was noted above, switching contracts from one firm to another after the first expires usually means that the same people who were there before simply get a paycheck from a different company when they are brought on by the new firm. And usually, that paycheck is bigger.
 
2006-07-26 10:00:36 PM  
/forgive my drunk spelling above...
 
2006-07-26 10:47:17 PM  
The way it was explained on the news is that the "small" companies who are awarded the contracts are actually sub-contractors of the larger companies. Since they fall under a "large" company umbrella, it is the large company that is considered to have gotten the contract.
 
2006-07-26 11:38:54 PM  
Wal Mart is very small when you consider what fraction of the universe that their stores serve.
 
2006-07-27 12:53:55 AM  
Let me just state that the GAO is the biggest POS government organization. 90% of the gov't waste comes from their oversight. The other 10% is a result of the gov't being the largest corporation in the country (world?). Private corporations half their size have more waste and still please their investors. It's just cause "it's the taxpayers dollar" that anyone makes a big deal about it.

Just look at the salaries of most of the high-level government executives. Hell, the President only makes 400k a year. How many CEOs make more than that while overseeing a corporation 1/100th the size?
 
2006-07-27 12:01:13 PM  
Heh, and my contracting company just had to make the transition from "Small Minority-Owned Business" to "Minority-Owned Business" this year...forces the project managers to find small businesses to partner with, which is a big pain.

Worked a couple years back for a big USAID contractor that kept a huge database of various set-aside qualified contracting companies that we regularly scanned through to find a vaguely related skillset. The small business ones were tough to work with because they often didn't have nearly the logistical support the big guys did, but the nonprofits are the real PITA. Nothing like cleaning up the shoddy work of an NGO to brighten up a morning.

Oh, and given the prevalence of cost-plus contracts in the civil sector (everything but Defense and DHS, basically), the only way to really get rich is graft (of which there is definitely some). It's the big Defense contracts, however, that need some screws tightened.

// Still waiting for my next permanent clearance, dammit
// Been almost a year
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report