PDA

View Full Version : Army awards, then takes away the M4 contract with Remington



Stickman
1 October 2012, 14:41
For people who haven't been watching, Remington was awarded a contract to build M4s for the military (max contract 120,000 M4s). As you can imagine, Colt was not fond of this, and protested the decision. After all, Colt prides itself on supplying those weapons, and it is more than just part of the Colt legacy, it is $84,000,000 we are talking about in this contract.

The Army has just announced they are going to solicit new bids, and while I'm uncertain if this suddenly opens the bidding for everyone. This is going to be rough for Remington as their bottom line figure was already announced, which means their bid is no longer competitive as everyone else can see what they need to beat....

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2012/10/01/m4-contract-protest-update-the-army-is-going-to-solicit-new-bids/#more

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2012/04/24/remington-confirms-us-army-m4m4a1-contract-award/


What do you guys think? Is Colt just complaining because they have failed to move on with the times, or is this a legit complaint against Remington and the Freedom Group?

zero7one
1 October 2012, 15:12
I am not 100% sure how the first bid went down, but if it was a legit bid process and Remington won, then Colt shouldn't have had much to say. If the Army just decided to give it to Remington without a proper bid, then a complaint from Colt would be warranted. Just because you had previously held the contract and someone else can produce the same product for cheaper, then maybe your original bid should have been more competitive. Just my $0.02 worth.

gatordev
1 October 2012, 16:10
I'm not smart on the M4 bidding, but this wouldn't be the first time that one defense contractor got the winning bid and another one complained which opened the bid again. See: Boeing and Airbus tanking debacle or the Beech/Hawker cryfest against Embraer's Super T already established and proven airframe. Assuming the bid process was on the up and up, this stuff is silly, especially when the various companies would still build their product (whatever it may be) in the U.S. and employ U.S. workers.

Pork Chop
2 October 2012, 03:43
I hope Colt doesn't have problems with their M4's like they had with their 1911's recently supplied to the Marines for testing.


Sent using TapaTalk app.

MoxyDave
2 October 2012, 07:47
Having worked for various tech companies on military contracts, I've seen many cases where seemingly valid winning proposals were protested. The bidding process is completely broken. There are all kinds of back-door dealings and unscrupulous activities, at least in the tech sector. My guess is weapons manufacturing contracts are not all that different. Just my $.02.

TangoSauce
2 October 2012, 08:34
I am not 100% sure how the first bid went down, but if it was a legit bid process and Remington won, then Colt shouldn't have had much to say. If the Army just decided to give it to Remington without a proper bid, then a complaint from Colt would be warranted. Just because you had previously held the contract and someone else can produce the same product for cheaper, then maybe your original bid should have been more competitive. Just my $0.02 worth.

What I recall from this bidding fiasco was that Colt was not happy with how Remington represented their bid. Remington price per M4 was quite low which is part of why they won. However, they did not include royalties to Colt in their price for their design. Including this number, the prices were much more competitive between the two companies. Colt seems to feel that they would have won if Remington would have indicated this more clearly.

Now this is how I see it, I'm sure Stickman knows MUCH more about the details with this one.

Stickman
2 October 2012, 16:13
As Moxy commented, there is a lot more than goes on in bids than simply the item and the price. A large portion of things can often be sniping the other companies before, during, or after the bid process.

M. Gale
2 October 2012, 16:57
Remington FAILED to include the royalty to Colt in their bid. They didn't play by the rules and got caught out. Big boy rules apply...

TripleBravo
2 October 2012, 19:29
Remington FAILED to include the royalty to Colt in their bid. They didn't play by the rules and got caught out. Big boy rules apply...

That seems like a pretty big deal...and I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, but how did the Army miss that when reviewing the bid in the first place?

Stickman
2 October 2012, 21:29
Remington FAILED to include the royalty to Colt in their bid. They didn't play by the rules and got caught out. Big boy rules apply...


That is certainly one version of the story.

Paulo_Santos
3 October 2012, 06:33
I've learned not to get involved or even care what the military does when it comes to contracts because of all of the political bullcrap that goes on behind the scenes.

Stickman
3 October 2012, 13:06
Paulo,

I've been involved in some contracts with weapons, and know people how have been involved in Homeland Security weapon contracts... none of it is what I would post, but a functioning weapon seems to have very little to do with it.

rob_s
4 October 2012, 01:56
If Colt somehow engaged in unscrupulous practices to get the award overturned, it's safe to say that Remington did the same to get the award in the first place.

Which creates a rather interesting equal, if unethical, playing field.

markm
4 October 2012, 06:55
I've learned not to get involved or even care what the military does when it comes to contracts because of all of the political bullcrap that goes on behind the scenes.

NO shit! Who gives a f@#K???? It doesn't even make for good internut masturbation conversation.

FredeTredwell
15 May 2013, 00:31
Hiring armed security guard that will be a very beneficial deal for every home and office owners when they thinks about their home or office security or safety. Many security agency are working in the market that provides well trained security guards hiring services for home and office security.

mlosi762
15 May 2013, 08:05
Hiring armed security guard that will be a very beneficial deal for every home and office owners when they thinks about their home or office security or safety. Many security agency are working in the market that provides well trained security guards hiring services for home and office security.

WTF??? How do we keep getting all these bots and/or trolls around here?