Letter: Commercial terms among vendors and government should match

Regarding "GSA short on customer input": I find it difficult to verify that schedule prices are x% discounted from list prices, especially when the only list price available is the schedule price.

In my purchases, [General Services Administration] Schedule prices are always just a starting point for negotiations.  Rarely do I pay the schedule price.  So what does that say about competitive schedule pricing?

I think the schedule contracts for COTS [commercial-off-the-shelf] software should already modify vendors standard commercial terms to match those of the government (i.e., no terminations without the CDA, Prompt Pay supercedes commercial interest charges, only the DOJ can defend the Govt in court, state law vs. federal law, taxes, "entire contract," termination, indemnity, injuctive relief, limitations on actions, etc.)

Also need to address the fact that software maintenance is normally paid one year in advance as standard industry practice.  If my vendors change that practice, the GV always ends up paying more because of all the extra work involved in monthly and quarterly billing.

Anonymous

What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to [email protected] (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Featured

  • Workforce
    White House rainbow light shutterstock ID : 1130423963 By zhephotography

    White House rolls out DEIA strategy

    On Tuesday, the Biden administration issued agencies a roadmap to guide their efforts to develop strategic plans for diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA), as required under a as required under a June executive order.

  • Defense
    software (whiteMocca/Shutterstock.com)

    Why DOD is so bad at buying software

    The Defense Department wants to acquire emerging technology faster and more efficiently. But will its latest attempts to streamline its processes be enough?

Stay Connected