Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Heretalearn

Members
  • Content Count

    133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Heretalearn

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Chicago

Recent Profile Visitors

7,607 profile views
  1. It shouldn't unless it's a separate corporate/legal entity. A subsidiary can be (usually is) a separate corporate/legal entity.
  2. There aren't any pat answers to your quandary (except the one Vern Edwards gave you in the first paragraph of his post #14)., Your details are a little sketchy and ambiguous in places for anyone to give you answers which would be much practical use to you. Presumably you have a subcontract with the contractor only, so all of your obligations and protections flow from the subcontract and are owed to the "Prime" Contractor. (I'm a little puzzled that you're being asked as a to counter-execute the "prime" contract modification, but I don't know that that's unheard of.) If you turn down the off
  3. That there are business risks at issue for you doesn't make the arrangement illegal. Is the "prime" seeking your input and counsel with regard to constructing the modification, and have you advised it of your concerns - or is the "prime" intending or attempting to impose it upon you unilaterally somehow once the prime and agency have negotiated the mod?
  4. Why should you have to deal with them? Because "They got their hands on various audit reports and demand (you) issue contracts for various services identified in them"?
  5. As should 52.222-43 or 44 (the Price Adjustment clauses) with their Part 22 prescriptions. Pay attention to the time frames.
  6. Either works out to the detriment of (statutorily and regulatorily undefined) mid-sized businesses in my experience. Diversity favors small businesses with preferences, and strategic sourcing favors truly large businesses offering economy of scale.
  7. H2H, the triggers are similar, but not identical. (All emphasis below is added.) Limitation of Cost: "The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that (1) The costs the Contractor expects to incur under this contract in the next 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of the estimated cost specified in the Schedule; or (2) The total cost for the performance of this contract, exclusive of any fee will be either greater or substantially less than hand been previously estimated." Limitation of Funds: "T
  8. Given the question, I would have thought the Limitation of Funds clause more pertinent than the Limitation of Cost clause. Maybe I misunderstood the questions.
  9. In my experience such a plan would describe the responsibilities of the prime and each sub as they relate to each other, the distribution of work, the lines of authority (bearing in mind that the prime must be "in charge"), perhaps a past working relationships among the prime and the sub(s), the qualifications of the subs, the prime's past experience in managing subs, etc. The Government wants to know how the use of the subs will benefit the project, how it would all work smoothly, and if there's any prime/sub management experience or history that would help them be more comfortable that all
  10. Post 17 is spot on as it pertains to the original quote. The rub is that prospective sellers who don't know how to "break in", don't know what they don't know. Unfortunately, even taking the time to give every cold-caller the information in post 17's last paragraph would, I'm willing to be, be time-prohibitive.
  11. As an incumbent, using the question and answer process to strategically ensure that competitors are aware of "hidden" costs can sometimes be useful.
  12. AmericanJan, you seem to be implying that the government is behaving coercively. If the government POC phrased this as a question (I.e, it's not holding the change order "hostage" for the free brackets), it just sounds like negotiation to me. However, if you're entitled to payment for the change to A and you're entitled to payment for the change to B, the real question is whether you see an benefit to giving away something you're entitled to payment for.
  13. Bravo. Illustrates the relationship between legislatures and citizenry pretty well too.
×
×
  • Create New...