Jump to content

Gordon Shumway

Members
  • Posts

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gordon Shumway

  1. @Don Mansfield niiiiice! Good move. #MCGA
  2. Isn't the DOD currently bringing this back?
  3. I'm confused... Did @ji20874 not provide the answer in the first response?
  4. I am assuming this is the typical 12-month base with four 12-month options set up? If it's really that big of a problem, the government can choose to not exercise the first option year and recompete the contract early. Or move forward with termination proceedings. Either way, this is a government/Scuzzball problem. If the customer is unhappy as you say, and just taking your story as is, it seems they would be, I'm sure the contracting office is scrambling to find a fix. They probably don't need you popping in, adding fuel to the fire.
  5. Stop calling it a clause. It discredits the rest of your thought process.
  6. Churn and burn, baby!! @rsenn Like ji said, if you have questions, just ask... worst case the KO just ignores you. And if you are a small business, reach out to the OSBP/OSDBU POC and tell them how you lost but have a few questions to help make your proposal more competitive for the next time.
  7. @PepeTheFrog LOL, what's your student loan payment look like? $10k per month? @Boof @Todd Davis @here_2_help Thanks for the input!
  8. So, as the title of the post says, is the CPCM worth getting? Thoughts? I plan on sitting for the certification this summer. I'd like to hear how it is viewed from both perspectives, government and private industry. Thanks!
  9. @PepeTheFrog Let's make this happen! @Todd Davis This guy knows what I'm talking about.
  10. Small business coordination, such a cog in the wheel of efficiency. All such forms should be done away with. #MCGA
  11. Have you read... 1.602-3 -- Ratification of Unauthorized Commitments. (a) Definitions. “Ratification,” as used in this subsection, means the act of approving an unauthorized commitment by an official who has the authority to do so. “Unauthorized commitment,” as used in this subsection, means an agreement that is not binding solely because the Government representative who made it lacked the authority to enter into that agreement on behalf of the Government.
  12. Don't do this, it's bad business. http://www.wifcon.com/analysis.htm >> Market Research--A Tale of Two Markets By Christopher E. Harris, CFCM, CPCM How so?
  13. Why not just set up options on your order with small quantities? Thinking out loud here... probably slightly less annoying than cutting a bunch of small delivery orders and you only fund what you need. (Sorry for the multiple posts, I'm bored and have had way too much coffee.)
  14. So you assume the contractor is going to just agree to reduce the value of the order? This firm must have very forgiving shareholders.
  15. I would agree with your legal and say no can do. FAR 16.505(a)(2) states, "Individual orders shall clearly describe all services to be performed or supplies to be delivered so the full cost or price for the performance of the work can be established when the order is placed."
  16. @Gns Yep. http://www.wifcon.com/cgen/41310410.pdf (Nice win for the guy that publishes http://smallgovcon.com/ )
  17. Find some BAA samples, understand how others went about procuring R&D, and customize the process to meet your agencies specific needs. R&D contracting is definitely a niche type of procurement, and each military branch has contracting shops dedicated to supporting R&D efforts... you could try reaching out to POCs within those offices and see if you can get some guidance on particular areas where you need clarification. Places like DARPA, ONR/NRL, ACC-APG/ARL, AFOSR/AFRL, just to name a few shops dedicated to R&D contracting.
  18. Real quick, before you head to that corner, remember, the objective is to obtain the best value for the government. If you can get a contractor that is only slightly more risky than the least risky offeror (assuming no ties), yet offers a significantly lower price, you'll have a hard time convincing leadership and OGC that trade-off wouldn't yield a better value. Like Mr. Edwards said, the key "is to be ready to provide a coherent explanation for everything." It's not about being right or wrong, or being the most knowledgeable. It's about convincing risk adverse people (with no real incentive to take a risk) to put themselves out there for your approach. And yes, mistakes will sink you. God speed.
×
×
  • Create New...