3 ms·
Traditional companies struggle to navigate the government acquisitions process, or acquisitions can be so different than traditional manufacturing and customer
by cheschire 6y ago
Traditional companies struggle to navigate the government acquisitions process, or acquisitions can be so different than traditional manufacturing and customer sales that it would require a completely separate company to manage the risks anyways.
Instead you typically wind up with a contractor company that can work the system and they act as a middle tier that interfaces with the production company. In the case of vehicles you could imagine a low end contractor would negotiate production fleet vehicles. A mid range contractor might build custom versions using a stock base with a different cabin/storage. The large contractor can handle the full lifecycle including the protracted support and maintenance requirements.
- kube-system 6y agoIIRC, the existing USPS vehicles are made with a lot of off-the-shelf parts from existing automakers and their suppliers. In a way, this really isn't that much different than traditional automakers -- a lot of them share parts, or even entire chassis designs. I would expect that these will probably also share a lot of parts from other existing vehicles. The difference is that a government contractor has expertise in packaging everything to meet a single customer's needs. Traditional automakers don't really do this -- they build to their own spec.
- antattack 6y agoChevy has no issues selling their cars directly to government agencies and Ford to Police. So I think that theory is debunked. More likely reason is politics.
- cheschire 6y agoGM's own website about government sales references things I specifically said, so I'm unsure what you're referring to. "Our team can work with you to develop your bid or connect you with the appropriate dealer to fulfill your needs." https://www.gmfleet.com/government-fleets https://www.gmfleet.com/government-fleets