North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: NPR morning news apparently just reported...
On Fri, 23 May 2003 [email protected] wrote: > > On Fri, 23 May 2003, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > > > > > A government contract handed out not on technical merit, but for back room > > political reasons ? Shocking! > > > > ---Mike > > > > At 01:33 PM 23/05/2003 -0700, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > > > > > According to this article, yes they were involved with > > > > AWCC: > > > > http://www.afghanwireless.com/news_6apr.html > > > > > >Ouch. If they were responsible for AWCC, that would hardly seem to be a > > >basis for awarding them another similar contract. > > The funny this is at the state agencies I've worked for we were *required* > to go through a bidding procedure prior to getting final approval for a > purchase. Unless we had an established relationship with a given company > for similar products or services we had to follow the procedures. I > wouldn't at all be surprised to hear that sometime in the very near future > a lawsuit was filed by various other telcos to try and get a piece of the > pie or get the administration to be fair towards other telcos. Who says > it has to be a US telco? Why can't it be a UK telco? please note I'm not a business guy, nor do I know anything directly about this case... BUT, perhaps the contract was awarded on/with the FTS200X contract? (its 2002 now I believe that WCOM/MCI is the prime on... or atleast heavily related too) That would mean the gov't had a vehicle to just create a task order to make the network buildout happen... As to 'why a us company', perhaps its being done under the auspices of: "The us gov't needs a phone network in iraq while they are there, so build something good and leave it behind, as a bonus to the luckyiraq people?" (and not again the initial paragraph from me... add to that: I didn't read either of these articles)