(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5763) [ukfortran] RE: RE: Units of measure

[Tom Clune]

> On Jul 7, 2016, at 11:37 PM, Van Snyder <Van.Snyder at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> 
> A company that builds software tools (not NAG) contacted us.  We were
> expected to bear the entire development expense.  Then they would sell
> the tool (and sell maintenance and support to us) and we would not share
> in the profits.  We weren't sure whether Congress would stand for it.
> It looked too much like a "Solyndra" scam.  Maybe it would sneak
> through.  Our Ethics office said "don't touch it."  We didn't want to
> take the chance.  Somebody might have gotten fired, or even prosecuted.

Sounds like somebody explained this incorrectly to the Ethics office.  NASA routinely contracts for unique capabilities, and certainly never shares in the profits.     Yes - more review (and paperwork!) is required when there are not multiple bidders, but if the requirement exists, sole-source acquisitions are entirely appropriate.   Not to mention that you might actually get multiple bidders if you state your requirements with sufficient generality.   The company you mention (presuming it is the one I think it is), is just one that I met by happenstance at a conference.   There are likely others with other approaches given the chance to bid.

> 
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3