4 ms·

Someone made a killing on that deal if the blocks they used look anything like the ones in the article. Blocks similar to those in the article (2 ft tall, 2 ft

Someone made a killing on that deal if the blocks they used look anything like the ones in the article. Blocks similar to those in the article (2 ft tall, 2 ft wide, 3 ft long) can be bought for $50. Add a foot of length to that and they are $75. Someone there spent $1000/block and since those appear to be about 4 feet long they would likely cost about $100 each so the labor cost to install each block plus profit to the installer eats up $900. Probably a kickback in there somewhere. Of course with lawyers involved there was probably a round of blowjobs to buy for the team and the final cost of that would depend on which corner they visited for that service.

nkrisc 4y ago
Well if it was $100k to purchase and place them, then you're paying $1000 for the block itself, and for each one to be transported and placed. Not saying it wasn't grift, but it's not as simple as $1000 - $75 = $925 in the bank.
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  Remember that $925 is a per block rate. There is no way that transport, delivery, and installation is gonna eat up $900 per block. They will be transported on floats that can handle multiple blocks. A single block weighs approximately a ton so a loaded float can haul up to a couple dozen at a time. It will have the equipment to unload and place the blocks on the trailer so if you bought 100 blocks you have at most 5 loads. It takes one man less than 5 minutes to unload and place a block and if he has a swamper it is less time than that since the swamper can manage grabbing the blocks or setting them, either one. Your labor and fuel costs are gonna be low too since these will be procured locally. Any way you slice it you don't get to $900/block unless someone really pads the invoice. It was a giant rip-off from what I see.
  - Scoundreller 4y ago
    > unless someone really pads the invoice. Definitely. Since another level of government was paying (though a common set of tax payers...), there seemed to be a lot of running the clock. The war on drugs must not have budgetary limits! While creative, the entire strategy was ineffective: within hours the blocks would be removed, operations would resume and then the city would do it again. Textbook insanity.
    - doodlebugging 4y ago
      Yeah. Someone had a friend who needed some public money and would be happy to buy them lunch, or a boat or something, if they got that contract.
wmil 4y ago
They also needed an engineering company to sign off on the design of the blocks as being safe to stack and install.
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  This will eat up part of it for sure though the blocks, by design, are meant to be laid end to end and stacked. You can clearly see the notch in the bottom of the block in the photo and the triangular ridge on the top nests into that ridge so that you can build walls of any height by overlapping these blocks as you add the next layer to tie them together. Seems like a simple engineer's signature is all that would be required for that if that was even necessary. Highly debatable and definitely part of the invoice padding if that's how it worked.

nkrisc 4y ago

Well if it was $100k to purchase and place them, then you're paying $1000 for the block itself, and for each one to be transported and placed. Not saying it wasn't grift, but it's not as simple as $1000 - $75 = $925 in the bank.

doodlebugging 4y ago
Remember that $925 is a per block rate. There is no way that transport, delivery, and installation is gonna eat up $900 per block. They will be transported on floats that can handle multiple blocks. A single block weighs approximately a ton so a loaded float can haul up to a couple dozen at a time. It will have the equipment to unload and place the blocks on the trailer so if you bought 100 blocks you have at most 5 loads. It takes one man less than 5 minutes to unload and place a block and if he has a swamper it is less time than that since the swamper can manage grabbing the blocks or setting them, either one. Your labor and fuel costs are gonna be low too since these will be procured locally. Any way you slice it you don't get to $900/block unless someone really pads the invoice. It was a giant rip-off from what I see.
- Scoundreller 4y ago
  > unless someone really pads the invoice. Definitely. Since another level of government was paying (though a common set of tax payers...), there seemed to be a lot of running the clock. The war on drugs must not have budgetary limits! While creative, the entire strategy was ineffective: within hours the blocks would be removed, operations would resume and then the city would do it again. Textbook insanity.
  - doodlebugging 4y ago
    Yeah. Someone had a friend who needed some public money and would be happy to buy them lunch, or a boat or something, if they got that contract.

wmil 4y ago

They also needed an engineering company to sign off on the design of the blocks as being safe to stack and install.

doodlebugging 4y ago
This will eat up part of it for sure though the blocks, by design, are meant to be laid end to end and stacked. You can clearly see the notch in the bottom of the block in the photo and the triangular ridge on the top nests into that ridge so that you can build walls of any height by overlapping these blocks as you add the next layer to tie them together. Seems like a simple engineer's signature is all that would be required for that if that was even necessary. Highly debatable and definitely part of the invoice padding if that's how it worked.