Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: RE: RE: Great piece on RSS
 It is case by case, Elliotte. Some will sue and protest, others take their lumps and move on. Take note that in public safety, we are selling to the governments (really, agencies who get their directions from their local councils). Policies vary by locale. I think the distinction I made to John is important: to whom does the contract reserve rights. Shrinkwrap is different from systems integration sales. We get into the odd position of having to sell integrated systems that we control (our own software) and systems that we have to assert work as advertised (operating systems). In the second case, we take exception where possible and can because the customer names the operating system, so we can make it their responsibility. And yes, if one protests a procurement, one incurs the wrath of the procurement officials. Much depends at that point on the politics of the local councils, etc. If the bid was technically sound and protested on a nit, then the nitwit that protests doesn't do themselves much good. OTOH, timing is everything. Protesting just before an election can give the council opponents fodder for their TV ads. Depending on the election results and how effective the smear was, the whole business is tainted and the CYA act gets emotional. The example of failing to procure the lowest bid is illuminating; the opponent couples it to the failure to fund education and then the media is engaged to promote the perception of an insider deal that helps the official's brother to the detriment of the children. Now the emotions are fully engaged and the forebrain is disengaged, and well... crap. It takes some smooth talking to get them to remember that a cheaper system that is unreliable is far more dangerous to Everyone. Again, frequency of statement and the membership of the hearer in an interpretive community are the key properties of rhetorical marketing. This kind of thing is a nightmare but not exceptional. len -----Original Message----- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] At 12:23 PM -0500 10/10/02, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: >This isn't new news. Both are done. One >gathers opinions and contracts. Remember, >contracting is a formal process because of >protests. If one does things promiscuously, >the bid results are protested. Protests are >expensive for the contracting parties and >can result in rebids. Now all of that money >spent on process is lost and one has to start >over in some cases. In any case, the only >benefits go to the lawyers. > I'm familiar with this scenario in the government. In fact, there it's routine. However, it does not match my experience of small private enterprises. In particular, whenever a company I worked for collected bids, it felt free to rule out the lowest bid for any reason ranging from they didn't trust the company with the lowest bid to the coincidence that the highest bid was submitted by the CEO's fraternity brother. The bidders took their lumps and moved on. Is it different in the world of large, litigious corporations you seem to work in? For example, if Intergraph put out bids for long distance service to MCI, AT&T and Sprint, and eventually chose AT&T, would MCI or Sprint be likely to protest the result? I know that when the federal government puts out bids, such companies routinely protest and even sue when they lose, but I was under the impression the private sector was a little different; and that most people realized that whether they lost the bid fairly or unfairly, they 1. Had no right to sue over it. 2. Realized if they did sue, they'd never get any business from that company again. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
