Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

DGJDKO

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DGJDKO

  1. And no, it's not an express term, but we are treating it as such by making it the do-or-die negotiating point. We'll see if they walk away!
  2. All points very well taken. I didn't mean to veer off into organizational issues but I guess many times the pure work of contracting is constrained by the people involved. You reminded me to respect the power of a KO's signature and the responsibility attached thereto.
  3. I also meant to point out the first sentence of that FAR passage: "taking into account...reports of contributing specialists." Our opinion counts for at least something right?
  4. I can see how you would glean that from this conversation, and that's a fair response. But this particular KO is a completely"black-and-white" rule reader; inflexible and downright obstinate. I do NOT have a personal dislike for her so my professional opinion is not driven by emotion. I'm often given directives like this without any explanation at all. And while I agree with all said on this forum, our internal policy strongly suggests that we should focus on the primes analysis, if any(there is). So I was given a directive contrary to policy and without explanation (after requesting one)
  5. Excellent - thank you both. I'm the government Specialist on a cost reimbursement contract but with a fixed price subcontract. I had a KO say that only the weighted guidelines were acceptable for evaluating sub profit )( I misused the term fee earlier). Maybe to her, but I was thinking along the lines of Patrick's post. Our difference on this wouldn't normally matter much but I'm also working on a mod (different contract) to substitute subcontractors...and the although the new subs fee is very high the total subcontract price is actually lower. Her position is that the high fee is u
  6. Thank you... that's actually usefulto know. But my challenge is this: since we don't have privity of contract with the subcontractor; I.e. relationship is between the prime and the sub; aren't there factors that the prime may be considering that we have no reason to know? Couldn't there be lots of valid reasons why a prime considers a fee reasonable but inure to no direct benefit to the government? in my mind the weighted guidelines assume a direct contractual relationship , making it a less valuable tool for a subcontract. And does the primes analysis/rationale for the subcontracter
  7. Does anyone here use the weighted guidelines to evaluate the reasonableness of a subcontractor's fee? Would that be appropriate? This a firm-fixed price subcontract.
×
×
  • Create New...