Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Mega

Cut Or Walk

Recommended Posts

Thinking back, Tory gov in in 1979........by 80 it looked bad by 81 i was at the Toxeth riot.....WAR in 82....but by then we were all on Trainning courses paid for by Northsea oil/gas. We are importing both in ever bigger numbers.....i think DC will get to 2011 & it will start.....2012 will be "The" year.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:blink: My company is a big supplier with lots of PS contracts. It isn't mentioned in the top 20 but this is worrying. I thought we might be safe as we have, mostly, 10 year fixed contracts but now I am not sure.

Interesting times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"To assume that all outsourcers are quaking in their boots is wrong," he said. "It is very easy to say that the government is going to turn round and take 2pc off margins. That is slightly misconceived. There has to be a negotiation."

He added that while there might be some margin slippage in the short term, this will be in return for an extension to contracts of two or three years.

Andy Brown, an analyst at Panmure Gordon, said he still saw the government's efficiency drive as an "opportunity rather than a threat" for outsourcers, particularly those who could offer more than one service.

Sounds like they're going to be giving them more not less but in the meantime make it sound headline harsh.

Government patsies tax payer patsies.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Of course the biggest irony is all these companies could easily reduce costs if only the Government wouldn't insist on such ridiculous procurement practices.

I have rarely come across a Government IT procurement that doesn't waste inordinate time in dreaming up ludicrously complex and unnecessary requirements and which in the process will double or even triple the cost.

The absolute  classic in IT systems is that nearly all IT procurements will say they have to have 5 nines  (99.999%) system availability (ie no more than 5 minutes per year) because clearly the IT Manager doesn't want to be seen as being seen to have a system that is down as it might make him look bad and he might to work late one night. Of course the cost of this is truly massive, as everything, servers, networks, storage and software has to support redundancy and failover, and software upgrades have to be performed on a 2 part basis.

I have literally seen systems that might cost £3m in the private sector come out at £9m literally because of stupid and unnecessary requirements.  I don't blame the suppliers of the systems, as they have to answer the tender, the real problem is all the consultancies that leach on and create work and come up with these bloated statements of requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Noodle

 Of course the biggest irony is all these companies could easily reduce costs if only the Government wouldn't insist on such ridiculous procurement practices.

I have rarely come across a Government IT procurement that doesn't waste inordinate time in dreaming up ludicrously complex and unnecessary requirements and which in the process will double or even triple the cost.

The absolute  classic in IT systems is that nearly all IT procurements will say they have to have 5 nines  (99.999%) system availability (ie no more than 5 minutes per year) because clearly the IT Manager doesn't want to be seen as being seen to have a system that is down as it might make him look bad and he might to work late one night. Of course the cost of this is truly massive, as everything, servers, networks, storage and software has to support redundancy and failover, and software upgrades have to be performed on a 2 part basis.

I have literally seen systems that might cost £3m in the private sector come out at £9m literally because of stupid and unnecessary requirements.  I don't blame the suppliers of the systems, as they have to answer the tender, the real problem is all the consultancies that leach on and create work and come up with these bloated statements of requirements.

Exactly the same in the mud cleaning business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I have rarely come across a Government IT procurement that doesn't waste inordinate time in dreaming up ludicrously complex and unnecessary requirements and which in the process will double or even triple the cost.

The absolute  classic in IT systems is that nearly all IT procurements will say they have to have 5 nines  (99.999%) system availability (ie no more than 5 minutes per year) because clearly the IT Manager doesn't want to be seen as being seen to have a system that is down as it might make him look bad and he might to work late one night. Of course the cost of this is truly massive, as everything, servers, networks, storage and software has to support redundancy and failover, and software upgrades have to be performed on a 2 part basis.

Agreed. The other great one is the email system with sub-one second delivery times. FFS, WHY?

If people get their emails delivered in under 10 seconds, isn't that good enough? It's not like someone can read it and act on it in under a second, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Noodle

Agreed. The other great one is the email system with sub-one second delivery times. FFS, WHY?

If people get their emails delivered in under 10 seconds, isn't that good enough? It's not like someone can read it and act on it in under a second, is it?

Government (previous one) never understood the 80/20 rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Of course the biggest irony is all these companies could easily reduce costs if only the Government wouldn't insist on such ridiculous procurement practices.

I have rarely come across a Government IT procurement that doesn't waste inordinate time in dreaming up ludicrously complex and unnecessary requirements and which in the process will double or even triple the cost.

The absolute  classic in IT systems is that nearly all IT procurements will say they have to have 5 nines  (99.999%) system availability (ie no more than 5 minutes per year) because clearly the IT Manager doesn't want to be seen as being seen to have a system that is down as it might make him look bad and he might to work late one night. Of course the cost of this is truly massive, as everything, servers, networks, storage and software has to support redundancy and failover, and software upgrades have to be performed on a 2 part basis.

I have literally seen systems that might cost £3m in the private sector come out at £9m literally because of stupid and unnecessary requirements.  I don't blame the suppliers of the systems, as they have to answer the tender, the real problem is all the consultancies that leach on and create work and come up with these bloated statements of requirements.

Haha don't tell that to the new government if you work in IT. One has to feather their own nest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 140 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.