Jump to content

Amazon JEDI contract lawsuit talk not going away

immamac

By immamac
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

WBT

WBT 20776

Posted
Posted
Quote

“When you have a sitting president who’s willing to be very vocal that they dislike a company and the CEO of that company, it makes it difficult for government agencies, including the DoD to make objective decisions without fear of reprisal. And I think that’s dangerous and risky for our country,” he told CNBC’s Jon Fortt.

seems about right

Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28990

Posted
Posted

Nothing will come of this but I have no doubt that Trump railroaded the AWS bid. AWS was the clear front runner in the race for the JEDI contract with Azure a distant second and everyone else just going through the motions. Oh well, Federal Government contracts are shady as shit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Updawg

Updawg 2334

Posted
Posted
Nothing will come of this but I have no doubt that Trump railroaded the AWS bid. AWS was the clear front runner in the race for the JEDI contract with Azure a distant second and everyone else just going through the motions. Oh well, Federal Government contracts are shady as shit.
Yep, this was all aws until the end.

I guess there could be an argument of spreading the wealth to help out ms so Amazon doesn't completely rule but I doubt that was too much of a factor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grippe

Grippe 313

Posted
Posted

There's more to this:  Gov't acquisition through contracting has changed dramatically in the last few years where "Lowest cost, commercially available" isn't as straight forward as it used to be.

10 years ago, hell even 5 in some cases (GSA, ITES, etc.), the old rule of the cost-of-commodity (hardware/software) was still the primary consideration for awarding contracts - these days with the complexity of solutions (which have to be NIST 800-171 compliant (now including CMMC!!)) the PEO for the Gov't agency must look at the total solution - hardware, software, deployment, education, configuration, support, CUI Security, redeployment/recycling, etc. etc..

The real story isn't politics (/no cr, gasp!), it's that M$ is better at understanding PEO evaluations during contract awards than Amazon.  I find it hilarious that Bezos is crying 'unfair' and launching legal action, when for years he was the pontiff of beating the other guy by a better business model, and fighting so many lawsuits himself.

  • Like 4
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28004

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Grippe said:

There's more to this:  Gov't acquisition through contracting has changed dramatically in the last few years where "Lowest cost, commercially available" isn't as straight forward as it used to be.

10 years ago, hell even 5 in some cases (GSA, ITES, etc.), the old rule of the cost-of-commodity (hardware/software) was still the primary consideration for awarding contracts - these days with the complexity of solutions (which have to be NIST 800-171 compliant (now including CMMC!!)) the PEO for the Gov't agency must look at the total solution - hardware, software, deployment, education, configuration, support, CUI Security, redeployment/recycling, etc. etc..

The real story isn't politics (/no cr, gasp!), it's that M$ is better at understanding PEO evaluations during contract awards than Amazon.  I find it hilarious that Bezos is crying 'unfair' and launching legal action, when for years he was the pontiff of beating the other guy by a better business model, and fighting so many lawsuits himself.

...you do realize that AWS has billions of dollars in existing gov contracts, and even has an entire completely airgapped and extremely tightly governed cloud environment just for government workloads? Including their own backbone network that was built and is ran exclusively by and for AWS for govcloud use that meets all the regulatory requirements you mentioned?

I don't mean to tell you you're wrong that "AWS doesn't know how to talk government contracts"... But you're out of your element, Donnie

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28990

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

It's difficult not to CR this thread, in some regard. It's certainly bonkers. But if AWS was so far ahead, then someone will have to explain to me how going with Microsoft and an inferior product and offer isn't tantamount to weakening our defense department in some fashion? 

Microsoft Azure isn't vastly inferior and this isn't tantamount to weakening the defense department. Although the U.S. taxpayer may not be getting the biggest bang for their buck with this contract. AWS Gov cloud has been certified to support this initiative for over 4 years now. While Azure was officially certified at the same time, AWS already had everything in place prior to the certification when the feds were still banging out the actual requirements. The DoD kinda (pretty much did) customized the requirements for AWS. Anyways, the bulk of the cloud migration should have been in process by now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28004

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

It's difficult not to CR this thread, in some regard. It's certainly bonkers. But if AWS was so far ahead, then someone will have to explain to me how going with Microsoft and an inferior product and offer isn't tantamount to weakening our defense department in some fashion? 

Don't give a shit if it's breaking CR or not, it's pretty hard to decouple the two considering the subject matter.

Now I just can't imagine the same executive branch that forced DOJ to change its sentencing recommendation for a campaign adviser who was convicted by a jury on 7 felony counts including perjury, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering might just fuck with procurement contracts that involve the business of someone who the chief executive personally attacks on a regular and ongoing basis

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 48528

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, F250 said:

Microsoft Azure isn't vastly inferior and this isn't tantamount to weakening the defense department. Although the U.S. taxpayer may not be getting the biggest bang for their buck with this contract. AWS Gov cloud has been certified to support this initiative for over 4 years now. While Azure was officially certified at the same time, AWS already had everything in place prior to the certification when the feds were still banging out the actual requirements. The DoD kinda (pretty much did) customized the requirements for AWS. Anyways, the bulk of the cloud migration should have been in process by now.

 

I was struggling with the wording here, and went with weakening for lack of a better way to put it. But yeah, I meant the taxpayers aren't getting the best deal and the government is going with a product that isn't as far along. Either way, that seems like a form of collusion to me. I'm not really describing my thoughts here well, but I think everyone can hopefully get the gist of what I'm attempting to say. 

40 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Don't give a shit if it's breaking CR or not, it's pretty hard to decouple the two considering the subject matter.

Now I just can't imagine the same executive branch that forced DOJ to change its sentencing recommendation for a campaign adviser who was convicted by a jury on 7 felony counts including perjury, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering might just fuck with procurement contracts that involve the business of someone who the chief executive personally attacks on a regular and ongoing basis

Yeah. I mean, I know. At this point I suppose we're just throwing another book on the bonfire. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grippe

Grippe 313

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Captainant said:

...you do realize that AWS has billions of dollars in existing gov contracts, and even has an entire completely airgapped and extremely tightly governed cloud environment just for government workloads? Including their own backbone network that was built and is ran exclusively by and for AWS for govcloud use that meets all the regulatory requirements you mentioned?

I don't mean to tell you you're wrong that "AWS doesn't know how to talk government contracts"... But you're out of your element, Donnie

Ha, you so funny - if only I wasn't working on the contracting solution for this exact same program for an IT corporation headquartered in Round Rock.

Suck it Marie, you're clearly talking out of your ass because you cannot help yourself from going full CR.  Next time you want to internet pontificate you might want to consider that some of the posters here have considerable experience with the subject matter they're discussing (obviously not Hugo but he's our retard and we love him for all his faults).

SMMFH at the hubris...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28004

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Grippe said:

Ha, you so funny - if only I wasn't working on the contracting solution for this exact same program for an IT corporation headquartered in Round Rock.

Suck it Marie, you're clearly talking out of your ass because you cannot help yourself from going full CR.  Next time you want to internet pontificate you might want to consider that some of the posters here have considerable experience with the subject matter they're discussing (obviously not Hugo but he's our retard and we love him for all his faults).

SMMFH at the hubris...

What of my statements do you disagree with regarding AWS's positioning for gov contracts?

Or are you just attacking me for simply stating who this whole shitstorm involves, and acknowledging that there just *might* be a political reason for the decisions going the way they did?

Because you didn't disagree with anything I actually said, you just claim to be working on this 10 billion dollar contract, so therefore I'm wrong about everything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grippe

Grippe 313

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Captainant said:

What of my statements do you disagree with regarding AWS's positioning for gov contracts?

Or are you just attacking me for simply stating who this whole shitstorm involves, and acknowledging that there just *might* be a political reason for the decisions going the way they did?

Because you didn't disagree with anything I actually said, you just claim to be working on this 10 billion dollar contract, so therefore I'm wrong about everything?

kk, extending an olive branch here and providing a deeper description - please skip over the gov't purchasing if you're already aware of it.

Huge oversimplification: Any purchasing for the DoD isn't performed by the uniform service end-user.  The purchasing is done through an OSD PEO - civilian agents who control the funds, and who are audited by the GAO (see below).

In the last few years, in an effort to better understand (and compete for) DoD contracts, several large companies have shifted their "understand the customer" focus to include how PEO's  make their decisions - even going so far as to host senior PEO officers under government-to-corporate Fellowship programs for 1-year.  Microsoft had done a phenomenal job of learning PEO business and establishing relationships in those offices - and they aren't the only one to do so.

The central point of my original post - Amazon, who led the industry in so many ways, has not kept up with other companies (such as Microsoft) in trying to fully understand the PEO's.

Additional point - PEO selections such as this are 'typically' audited by the GAO, which reports it's findings directly to Congress.  I've worked with many of the PEO executives who are part of the Fellowship where I am fortunate enough to be employed, they are VERY conscientious about being as apolitical as possible and simply make the best decision they can for the end users and the taxpayers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28004

Posted
Posted

Big movement on the case - the presiding judge issued an injunction against MS to halt work until further notice. AMZN is also on the hook for a $42MM deposit to be awarded to MS as damages if the case is found to be specious.

Very very interesting development, I think either DoD is going to budge or AMZN is gonna get to start deposing some folks and making them submit to discovery. Which will certainly be interesting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Captainant

Captainant 28004

Posted
Posted (edited)

I know it's not coronavirus news, but big nonetheless

https://www.businessinsider.com/pentagon-reconsider-jedi-microsoft-amazon-web-services-2020-3

The Department of Defense on Thursday in a court filing said it "wishes to reconsider" its decision to award the $10 billion JEDI cloud computing contract to Microsoft, citing very specific challenges from Amazon on technical aspects of the Microsoft Azure cloud.

...

In what appears to be a tacit admission that Amazon has a legal case, the Pentagon also said its motion is "in the interests of justice it will provide the agency with an opportunity to reconsider the award decision at issue in light of AWS's allegations."

Edited by Captainant
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Captainant

Captainant 28004

Posted
Posted (edited)

Newest update on the JEDI saga:

https://www.businessinsider.com/dod-watchdog-jedi-award-trumps-role-unclear-2020-4

The DoD inspector general cleared the contract, but said it couldn't do a thorough investigation of Amazon's allegation about Trump's role in the decision because key witnesses were barred by the White House from cooperating with the probe. Nevertheless without evidence, the DoD IG asserts that there was no influence by the Whitehouse or DoD leadership on the selection boards that ultimately made the decision.

Very interesting, and I wonder what the next move is for AMZN since they're not going to be able to overrule a DoD and WH that don't want to answer questions.

Edited by Captainant
Link to comment
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...