[PoloSec]

Don't expect congress to do anything about it, its been going on forever.

Congress critters need to keep the funds flowing into their retirement accounts.

[Yo-Yo]

When I was in the Air Force, small electronic parts such as a diode, which cost $0.59 for a blister pack of 5 at Radio Shack, came individually wrapped in an airtight two layer package (inside mylar, outside brown paper) with the National Stock Number, lot number, date code, and contractor's name stamped on the outside. I'm sure those diodes cost at least $5.00 each.

If the military wants COTS pricing, they have to buy in COTS packaging as well.

[ßuddaßudd]

Change we can believe in . .

[Cheerio]

Having worked in the Defense contracting community for decades my bet is on the DOD/Govt insisting on absurd requirements for what may seem as simple commercial items, which drives the contractor to cover this in the price. If the CO is not conducting a proper cost/price analysis to determine that he is getting a “fair value” then he should be disciplined. I witness about 75% of contracts that were required to be changed by the CO for stupid reasons and the contractor has no option but to implement the change through the FAR “Changes” clause. If the contractor does not have a reasonable system of tracking these changes and submitting cost/price change proposals to the CO then they “eat it”. Contracting with the monopolistic USG is not all it is cracked up to be, particularly in complex acquisitions.

And it is far worse the further down the subcontractor chain you find yourself.

[TBP]

Here is someplace we could responsibly cut defense spending without negatively impacting readness.

[omega4412]

I’ve long wondered about the proverbial $700 government toilet seats. Was it $20 for the toilet seat and $680 excess profit, or was it a $20 toilet seat with $680 of paperwork?

[Don Corleone]

Don't expect congress to do anything about it, its been going on forever. Congress critters need to keep the funds flowing into their retirement accounts.

This is right on point. Having been a contracting officer in the military I witnessed the extreme influence brought to bear by politicians to secure contracts for their districts and states. Not always, but many times these contracts were let to firms that were in no way the best qualified or the lowest bidders. The pols have their hands in them all the time.

[Salgak]

Actually, MOST of the cost is for fulfilling utterly BS requirements placed on procurement by the Government.

Like requiring so much of the contracts to be awarded to “small disadvantaged businesses”. Or many other asinine requirements. . .

Example: One contract I was on, we were buying semiconductor chips as part of a system build. We had to certify, with proof, multiple inspections, and a massive paperwork trail, that we were NOT purchasing materials made from “conflict minerals”. Because there’s a law which forbids the Gov from buying from “tainted” sources. . . so even if the minerals were mined and refined in the US, and used in a US Chip fab. . .we STILL had to prove no “conflict minerals”. . .

$250 dollars or so of chips caused something like $10K in additional overhead, fees, certifications, etc. . .

[McGruff]

Why single out the Pentagon. I'll bet every agency is just as bad if not worse. Just look at this illegal alien bill.

[MrB]

Well, they DO have to pay for the detention facilities at Area 51 somehow...

[NonValueAdded]

so don’t car dealerships

[driftdiver]

I stopped doing business with the federal govt for the most part. They insist on nickle and dime me as a small business. I’ve had contracts where was charging twice my hourly rate and justified it as their expenses were higher.

[Myrddin]

Great prices come with mass production and volume sales to recover the sunk cost of setting up a production line over a large number of items. When the government requests 5 items that have been out of production for 20 years, there is a big cost to build the products again from original specs with current materials. You aren't ordering enough stock to spread the costs. If the government doesn't want to pay the price, don't order short runs of out of production items. If the government is going to start persecuting contractors for doing what was requested, there will be lots of "no bid" responses for future requests.

[Myrddin]

What is remarkable here is that we're crabbing about $200 million in "overpayments" to DoD contractors over multiple years while Obama asks $4.6 BILLION to pay for illegal alien invaders. Moochie and Ovomit have personally racked up over $1.5 BILLION in travel expenses since taking office. That is obscene.

[Robert357]

This is for military helicopters. Has anybody who complains about the excessive cost ever looked at a set of “milspecs” the detail the source and quality control steps associated with the making of a cheap part, but with excessive (read that expensive) documentation and testing?

The problem is not the contractors over-charging the military, it is the military procurement policy that can transform a washer purchased at Home Depot for 10 cents, into a custom built washer packaged with $59.90 of paperwork on the mine the iron came from, the batch of steel it was produced in, the milling machine that made it and testing documentation at each step.

[Dick Vomer]

how are they going to buy the “black” purchases that nobody knows about? Lots of stealth equipment and R&D go into a $500 toilet seat.,,,,oh had kickbacks, graft and bonuses for flag officers on the gravy train as “consultants”.

[joe fonebone]

the pentagon brings it upon themselves...

i quoted a job that required a bolt..just a plain old steel bolt...

but this bolt is not manufactured anymore..

so, instead of changing the friggin bolt, we have to have a company tool up and MAKE them..

cost at a bolt store, 12.00 dollars..

cost for a surplus bolt as required..9800.00 dollars..

yes, nine thousand eight hundred dollars... APIECE...

we needed 4 of them..