3 ms·

And this likely cost over $10 million. Will not be surprised if it's $100m.

by dannyr 7y ago

xxpor 7y ago
Found this: Duration of the performance-based contract will be three and a half years, with a total potential value of $128 million. It provides for additional options of up to 10 years. https://gcn.com/Articles/2004/08/09/USDA-awards-contract-for-Recreation-OneStop.aspx?m=1 https://gcn.com/Articles/2004/08/09/USDA-awards-contract-for... Sooooo yeah.
- mceoin 7y ago
  I read through these contracts a _long_ time ago. I think the contract is for managing a bunch of parks stuff and is expansive far beyond the website.
- xur17 7y ago
  That article is from 2004, is this a new site, or something that was just released?
- kristopolous 7y ago
  The fetish we have with trying to private sector everything is a financial disaster. We can pay people to build it directly, it's ok. There doesn't need to be an unaccountable greased palm making $100 million in the background through some "public-private partnership". If the contractor makes a profit we pay more. If instead the government makes a profit, we pay less (see public banking for an example). Kinda funny how that works.
  - mortdeus 7y ago
    The government makes a profit? How does that work?
    - mikekchar 7y ago
      Lots of government operations around the world make a profit. Usually the money is reinvested to improve operations, but it can also be sent back for general spending depending on the structure of the organisation. Now, it's been a very long time since I lived in Canada, but the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) used to make a tidy profit. It also used to be the largest single purchaser of wine in the world and as such was able to get incredibly rare wine. Back in the day, if you wanted to tour a winery someday, you could often set it up with the LCBO and the winery would absolutely roll out the red carpet for you. Not sure if that hack still exists, but it was pretty sweet 10-20 years ago. Although unpopular with a lot of people due to all the politics that a government monopoly on alcohol gave, the LCBO was profitable and provided surprisingly good value (as long as you happened to live near a store where influential people lived :-P ). Like I said, it's been ages since I lived there, so I'm not sure what the current status is, but it lasted a long time due to its ability to deliver service and provide revenue for the government.
    - jogjayr 7y ago
      Antrix Corp owned by the Indian government provides satellite launch services. It made $31m profit on $210m revenue in 2017-2018.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antrix_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antrix_Corporation
    - kristopolous 7y ago
      One of the most common vehicles for this are Sovereign Wealth Funds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund Norway uses one for their pension program (AUM of > $1 trillion, owning over 1.4% of the global stock market, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Nor...) My favorite one, however, was created by Ronald Reagan, the United States Mint Commemorative Coin Program: > Since the modern commemorative coin program began in 1982, the United States Mint has raised more than $506,301,189 in surcharges to help build new museums, maintain national monuments... and much more. https://www.usmint.gov/news/inside-the-mint/commemorative-coin-program-over-the-years https://www.usmint.gov/news/inside-the-mint/commemorative-co... Honestly a world where the government has, say a commercial for-profit version of NPR, high speed internet, etc, that coexists with other current offerings and then re-invests that into government programs and needs less tax dollars from me sounds like a great idea. Tax payer money already paid for most of the infrastructure, we might as well profit from it. There's some odd political animosity to it however, as if asking for a tax-payer owned version of NBC with some entertaining primetime shows is like some kind of slippery slope to autocratic socialism ... it's actually bringing capitalism into the government like never before and allowing them to say, not have to ask me to vote on raising my sales tax to build a train. Instead they ask us how we want to use all those sweet profits. ... it'd be nice ...

And this likely cost over $10 million. Will not be surprised if it's $100m.

by dannyr 7y ago

And this likely cost over $10 million. Will not be surprised if it's $100m.

Found this: Duration of the performance-based contract will be three and a half years, with a total potential value of $128 million. It provides for additional options of up to 10 years. https://gcn.com/Articles/2004/08/09/USDA-awards-contract-for-Recreation-OneStop.aspx?m=1 https://gcn.com/Articles/2004/08/09/USDA-awards-contract-for... Sooooo yeah.

mceoin 7y ago
I read through these contracts a _long_ time ago. I think the contract is for managing a bunch of parks stuff and is expansive far beyond the website.
xur17 7y ago
That article is from 2004, is this a new site, or something that was just released?
kristopolous 7y ago
The fetish we have with trying to private sector everything is a financial disaster. We can pay people to build it directly, it's ok. There doesn't need to be an unaccountable greased palm making $100 million in the background through some "public-private partnership". If the contractor makes a profit we pay more. If instead the government makes a profit, we pay less (see public banking for an example). Kinda funny how that works.
- mortdeus 7y ago
  The government makes a profit? How does that work?
  - mikekchar 7y ago
    Lots of government operations around the world make a profit. Usually the money is reinvested to improve operations, but it can also be sent back for general spending depending on the structure of the organisation. Now, it's been a very long time since I lived in Canada, but the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) used to make a tidy profit. It also used to be the largest single purchaser of wine in the world and as such was able to get incredibly rare wine. Back in the day, if you wanted to tour a winery someday, you could often set it up with the LCBO and the winery would absolutely roll out the red carpet for you. Not sure if that hack still exists, but it was pretty sweet 10-20 years ago. Although unpopular with a lot of people due to all the politics that a government monopoly on alcohol gave, the LCBO was profitable and provided surprisingly good value (as long as you happened to live near a store where influential people lived :-P ). Like I said, it's been ages since I lived there, so I'm not sure what the current status is, but it lasted a long time due to its ability to deliver service and provide revenue for the government.
  - jogjayr 7y ago
    Antrix Corp owned by the Indian government provides satellite launch services. It made $31m profit on $210m revenue in 2017-2018.[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antrix_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antrix_Corporation
  - kristopolous 7y ago
    One of the most common vehicles for this are Sovereign Wealth Funds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund Norway uses one for their pension program (AUM of > $1 trillion, owning over 1.4% of the global stock market, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Pension_Fund_of_Nor...) My favorite one, however, was created by Ronald Reagan, the United States Mint Commemorative Coin Program: > Since the modern commemorative coin program began in 1982, the United States Mint has raised more than $506,301,189 in surcharges to help build new museums, maintain national monuments... and much more. https://www.usmint.gov/news/inside-the-mint/commemorative-coin-program-over-the-years https://www.usmint.gov/news/inside-the-mint/commemorative-co... Honestly a world where the government has, say a commercial for-profit version of NPR, high speed internet, etc, that coexists with other current offerings and then re-invests that into government programs and needs less tax dollars from me sounds like a great idea. Tax payer money already paid for most of the infrastructure, we might as well profit from it. There's some odd political animosity to it however, as if asking for a tax-payer owned version of NBC with some entertaining primetime shows is like some kind of slippery slope to autocratic socialism ... it's actually bringing capitalism into the government like never before and allowing them to say, not have to ask me to vote on raising my sales tax to build a train. Instead they ask us how we want to use all those sweet profits. ... it'd be nice ...