just a question.. not even true troll bait.. Is Haliburton a Dubai Corporation now that gets no bid contracts from USA
- Thread starter dahunan
- Start date
ProfJohn
Lifer
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,251
- 8
- 0
The company is still incoporated in Houston. And the Dubai HQ is a second one.
Many multi-national companies have similar set ups. GM has divisions based in Europe etc.
And the whole no bid thing is a bunch of BS. The company got no bid contracts under Clinton as well. It has little to do with Chenney and more to do with the fact that very few companies can provide the types of services they do.
Many multi-national companies have similar set ups. GM has divisions based in Europe etc.
And the whole no bid thing is a bunch of BS. The company got no bid contracts under Clinton as well. It has little to do with Chenney and more to do with the fact that very few companies can provide the types of services they do.
Nor can a company develop the ability to take these contracts with the no-bid structure. At least if there was a bid offered, there could be some level of competition from a group of companies, perhaps forcing KBR/Haliburton to offer a better level of service due to competition (yea, that's right, free market forces...)
yllus
Elite Member & Lifer
- Aug 20, 2000
- 20,577
- 432
- 126
ProfJohn is correct on this one. KBR/Haliburton is pretty much the only company in the world that offers the variety and depth of services that were needed for the job. Also, their infamous no-bid win was a result of their offer to put up a cost-plus-1% contract.
Now, that's not to say a contract framed like that can't be abused - but, sadly, when does government ever do anything cost-effectively?
The Basics of Halliburton's Military Contracts
Now, that's not to say a contract framed like that can't be abused - but, sadly, when does government ever do anything cost-effectively?
The Basics of Halliburton's Military Contracts
yllus
Elite Member & Lifer
- Aug 20, 2000
- 20,577
- 432
- 126
DAMN THAT MEGACORPORATION FOR WANTING TO MAKE MONIES YOU SHOULD HAVE A PRICY DRAWN-OUT BID PROCESS IN WHICH HALIBURTON WINS ANYWAYS BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL THE ONLY COMPANY THAT CAN ACTUALLY DO THE JOB AHHHHH!
I dunno, the whole "Dick Cheney" argument for KBR getting the contract is rather tiresome. Most people around here prefer conspiracy to actual truth though.
Preemtive move to escape investigation, prosecution. Just like the Post Box Headquarters scam other companies do.
The Clinton BS excuse does not work anymore. He has not been President the past 8 years.
Its long past time to kick these companies out of our country.
Their "services" are not in the best interest of our country.
Treason and Traitors must be enforced as Treason and Traitors once again.
Exactly what does that have to do with all of the fraud complaints that have been filed against Halliburton and their sub, KBR, in their contracts in Iraq?
Getting back to the OP's question, what does it have to do with the fact that they got inflated no bid contracts in Iraq?
With respect to your post, we went into Afghanistan in the aftermath of 9-11. We were right to do it because that's where the enemy who attacked us was, and, without further analysis of whether it was done well, I can understand where no bid contracts could be necessary under that rush to battle.
Your Traitor In Chief and his criminal gang were already planning to invade Iraq even before 9-11, and it took them nanoseconds to realize they'd could manufacture the excuse by linking Saddam to Al Qaeda.
They had plenty of time to do a better job, but, as time has shown, they were totally incompetent, and Cheney's old Hailliburton pals, who still pay his retirement benefits from their profits, along with large contributors, got those highly profitable "cost plus" plums without the slightest thought about competetive bids, let alone oversight or quality control.
GroundedSailor
Platinum Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 2,502
- 0
- 76
KBR buys expensive truck. Truck gets flat tire. Truck abandoned on side of road, new truck bought. KBR makes cost of both trucks plus percent for profit.
How can they? Its a NO BID CONTRACT!!!
As pointed out above all they do is inflate any real cost and THEN addd 1% to that. So something that should have cost $100,000 is now $300,000 as 1% of 300k is more then 1% of 100k.
ebaycj
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2002
- 5,418
- 0
- 0
cost plus 1% is great, because you no longer have to worry about your costs. you just inflate them, report the inflated values as "cost", then take your 1%. 1% gets pretty large pretty quick when you are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars of "cost".
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
At the time there were several companies who complained that they offered the same services as Halliburton and wanted to bid on the contract. The "Nobody else can do what Halliburton does." claim is nonsense, parroted by the apologists to deflect criticism.
A cost-plus contract can be a good deal for both parties if the seller is scrupulous and the buyer vigilant. It can also be a gold mine for an unscrupulous seller if the buyer is inattentive or incompetent ... or if the buyer is in the pocket of the seller.
There are two big ways to scam cost-plus contracts. One, as has been pointed out already, is for the seller to pay inflated prices. This works especially well when the seller can pay inflated prices to its own subsidiaries, thus pocketing both the inflated margin and the inflated purchase cost.
For example, let's say the Army needs 100,000 sheets of plywood. The current market price is $20 per sheet, $2 million total, but Halliburton pays one of its own subsidiaries $50 per sheet, $5 million total. Halliburton bills the government its "cost" of $5M, plus a 1% margin of $50K. The Halliburton subsidiary, however, books an extra $3M in profit due to the inflated price. Nobody in the Pentagon bothers to confirm the actual market value of the plywood, perhaps because the boss doesn't want them to notice (he enjoys those all-expense-paid junkets to the Caribbean). The taxpayers take it in the shorts while Halliburton issues press releases about its patriotism and tremendous efficiency. For example.
Another way to scam a cost-plus is to inflate administrative expenses. For example, Halliburton has on office of 50 accountants, handling an assortment of contracts. It takes 80 hours per week to handle the LOGCAP bills. Instead of assigning two employees full-time, however, Halliburton spreads the work across ten employees, and bills taxpayers for 50% of all ten of them ... plus 1%, of course. We're suddenly paying 200 hours of salary for 80 hours of work, and Halliburton issues another press release.
By the way, we taxpayers also pay for the press releases since Halliburton buries them in a 600-page bill of its "costs". Plus 1%, of course!
Anyway, those are a couple of fictional (as far as we know) examples of how companies can make cost-plus contracts extremely lucrative. They can be a good deal for the buyer, but they can also be a real scam.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter