3 ms·

This is what they do with The Wave. I believe they allow 20 per day. 10 are first-come first-served and 10 are a lottery you can enter for a few dollars in ad

by refurb 4y ago

This is what they do with The Wave. I believe they allow 20 per day. 10 are first-come first-served and 10 are a lottery you can enter for a few dollars in advance. Seems pretty fair to me.

shp0ngle 4y ago
...that is exactly what the actual article is talking about. The lottery makes most money go to Booz Allen Hamilton.
- refurb 4y ago
  How do we know the money goes to Booz Allen? Presumably there is some sort of contract between BAH the government to run Recreation.gov? Does BAH keep the whole fee? Do they keep some of it? Did they get paid $0 and only get the fee?
  - giantg2 4y ago
    A lot of that is in the article. Nice little graphs of it too.
    - refurb 4y ago
      Please point it out? All I see is how much goes to the park, with the assumption the rest goes to recreation.gov, but just because the recreation.gov gets it doesn't mean Booz Allen keeps it all.
      - jfengel 4y ago
        Booz is recreation.gov.
        refurb 4y ago
        I get that, but Booz is a government contractor providing this service. Presumably there is some details in the contract that lay out where money collected goes. Some fees collected go to the Park Service, and some don't. Does Booz keep everything else? What are the contract details with the government?
      - kevviiinn 4y ago
        Recreation.gov is Booz Allen
      - systems_glitch 4y ago
        Article sez the gov't gets to collect $9 on a $10 entry for tickets that are awarded. Booz Allen keeps $10 entry on all tickets that aren't awarded. Apparently the award rate is around 3%. Booz Allen wouldn't have offered to design and run the whole thing "for free" if it wasn't immensely popular! They and others like them are not called "beltway bandits" for nothing.
        refurb 4y ago
        Booz Allen keeps $10 entry on all tickets that aren't awarded. But how do we know that's true. Has the author seen the contract between the government and Booz Allen?
        93po 4y ago
        From their own website: https://www.boozallen.com/s/insight/thought-leadership/reinventing-the-recreation-gov-customer-experience.html https://www.boozallen.com/s/insight/thought-leadership/reinv... > Recreation.gov was an investment for Booz Allen, designed collaboratively with participating agencies, but at no cost to the federal government. Instead of a traditional cost structure, the unique contractual agreement is a transaction-based fee model that lets the government and Booz Allen share in risk, reward, results, and impact. This is a true public-private partnership—it uses no government money. Of course they word this in a slimy, dishonest way. Boggles my mind that immediately after saying "no cost" they describe an "alternative cost structure", completely contradicting itself.
        refurb 4y ago
        Ok, but the question still stands. The government doesn't pay anything, but it does it get a cut? Usually contracts are written in some way like "vendor will keep first $10M of fees, thereafter sharing 50% of fees"
        0xffff2 4y ago
        Oh come on. I don't know enough to have a real opinion on the overall situation, but surely you can see the difference between "no cost" and "no cost to the federal government".
  - lifeonlars 4y ago
    They keep the whole fee.
  - nofunsir 4y ago
    YES they keep the whole lottery fee. WORSE YET, they get to set the fee themselves! The park system just goes along with what they pick. They got in trouble for this because by law there was supposed to be a public comment period regarding fee changes. They got some judge or official to sign off something saying effectively: "x = whatever BAH decides; Fee = x;"
ghaff 4y ago
The issue is that the losers still apparently pay. Take that away and I agree that some variant of this is probably the optimal system given too many people and not enough slots.

by refurb 4y ago

This is what they do with The Wave. I believe they allow 20 per day. 10 are first-come first-served and 10 are a lottery you can enter for a few dollars in advance. Seems pretty fair to me.

shp0ngle 4y ago

...that is exactly what the actual article is talking about. The lottery makes most money go to Booz Allen Hamilton.

refurb 4y ago
How do we know the money goes to Booz Allen? Presumably there is some sort of contract between BAH the government to run Recreation.gov? Does BAH keep the whole fee? Do they keep some of it? Did they get paid $0 and only get the fee?
- giantg2 4y ago
  A lot of that is in the article. Nice little graphs of it too.
  - refurb 4y ago
    Please point it out? All I see is how much goes to the park, with the assumption the rest goes to recreation.gov, but just because the recreation.gov gets it doesn't mean Booz Allen keeps it all.
    - jfengel 4y ago
      Booz is recreation.gov.
      - refurb 4y ago
        I get that, but Booz is a government contractor providing this service. Presumably there is some details in the contract that lay out where money collected goes. Some fees collected go to the Park Service, and some don't. Does Booz keep everything else? What are the contract details with the government?
    - kevviiinn 4y ago
      Recreation.gov is Booz Allen
    - systems_glitch 4y ago
      Article sez the gov't gets to collect $9 on a $10 entry for tickets that are awarded. Booz Allen keeps $10 entry on all tickets that aren't awarded. Apparently the award rate is around 3%. Booz Allen wouldn't have offered to design and run the whole thing "for free" if it wasn't immensely popular! They and others like them are not called "beltway bandits" for nothing.
      - refurb 4y ago
        Booz Allen keeps $10 entry on all tickets that aren't awarded. But how do we know that's true. Has the author seen the contract between the government and Booz Allen?
        93po 4y ago
        From their own website: https://www.boozallen.com/s/insight/thought-leadership/reinventing-the-recreation-gov-customer-experience.html https://www.boozallen.com/s/insight/thought-leadership/reinv... > Recreation.gov was an investment for Booz Allen, designed collaboratively with participating agencies, but at no cost to the federal government. Instead of a traditional cost structure, the unique contractual agreement is a transaction-based fee model that lets the government and Booz Allen share in risk, reward, results, and impact. This is a true public-private partnership—it uses no government money. Of course they word this in a slimy, dishonest way. Boggles my mind that immediately after saying "no cost" they describe an "alternative cost structure", completely contradicting itself.
        refurb 4y ago
        Ok, but the question still stands. The government doesn't pay anything, but it does it get a cut? Usually contracts are written in some way like "vendor will keep first $10M of fees, thereafter sharing 50% of fees"
        0xffff2 4y ago
        Oh come on. I don't know enough to have a real opinion on the overall situation, but surely you can see the difference between "no cost" and "no cost to the federal government".
- lifeonlars 4y ago
  They keep the whole fee.
- nofunsir 4y ago
  YES they keep the whole lottery fee. WORSE YET, they get to set the fee themselves! The park system just goes along with what they pick. They got in trouble for this because by law there was supposed to be a public comment period regarding fee changes. They got some judge or official to sign off something saying effectively: "x = whatever BAH decides; Fee = x;"

ghaff 4y ago

The issue is that the losers still apparently pay. Take that away and I agree that some variant of this is probably the optimal system given too many people and not enough slots.