Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

apsofacto

Members
  • Content count

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About apsofacto

  • Rank
    Bronze Member

Recent Profile Visitors

11,759 profile views
  1. Kickstarter and the GCPC

    I think Kickstarter may even agree here, assuming the Government is the sole funder. If there are many other funders, it would be nice to spread the cost of widget development around. If different federal agencies were funding without each others' knowledge, would that tick off the budget people? If the dollar amounts were large? I don't think you get to know who the other funders are. I have contributed to these before and I was one of many small funders. Kickstarter was able to aggregate my contribution with many others and throw a large wad of cash at the "creators". Aggregating lots of small contributions is Kickstarter's main purpose, I think. I can also confirm the funders' credit cards get charged prior to work commencing, not after completion and delivery. The financing issue is a great one to raise.
  2. I believe there is also a ceiling on the executive compensation that can be put in the indirect cost pool. H2H, is that factoid germane to the question? What I could find only addressed the amount of the compensation, didn't seem to address the manner in which they awarded it . . .
  3. This is in no way helpful to you, but I think you could have found them non-responsible during the pre-award phase due to a 'cannot render impartial advice'-type organizational conflict of interest. I had a follow-up question regarding Vern's T4C suggestion, which springs from my paranoia. If the Government sends a T4C notice to the Contractor without ordering the minimum, can the Contractor then request payment of the minimum? Is there a "stand-off", and if so, how would one resolve?
  4. They would run afoul of FAR 52.216-22, right? Government has to order at least the minimum, Contractor has to perform up to the max . . .
  5. I have never issued an unpriced purchase order (they may be horrible and I'm curious if anyone has experience), but it sounds like they were conceived with this circumstance in mind . . .
  6. He deserves better supporters that that!
  7. Increasing Rights in Software--> In-scope Change?

    C Culham beat me to it! That is always the first place I go when these questions come up. I usually think of passages like this form (Overseas Lease Group, Inc., B-402111, January 19, 2010) (emphasis added): I'm in the habit of putting a statement in new contracts like 'The purpose of this Contract is [broad statement]' for this very purpose. Hope that is a good habit, I think it helps put all proposers on notice what kind of changes could occur. Sounds like Fear's cost, schedule and type of work do not change much, so it sounds encouraging from the description.
  8. Still on team Drabkin. Has anyone switched sides since the thread began?
  9. Estimated Delivery Order

    Is this bad, though?
  10. I smell a price realism analysis. Did the solicitation use the word "realism" anywhere?
  11. Hi, Joel, Rent seeking, or good idea? Or both?
  12. I noticed there was an entry about reverse auctions for construction work. We are required by state law to solicit construction via sealed bidding, so reverse auctions are not so outlandish from my perspective. My perspective could be warped, though.
  13. Has this D&F become harder to write over the years? I don't remember it being too much of an obstacle, there was copious parroting of FAR 16.601.c. I know the Obama Administration wanted less T&M.
×