MastanKhan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 21,269
- Reaction score
- 166
- Country
- Location
Adding these terms will increase the overall price of any deal. You get what you pay for, and here you are getting quite a lot of solidity in the deal. Some of the points above could be deal-breakers for the companies as certain delays and glitches are unforeseeable in business and engineering (for example, "if no delivery by a certain date, the manufacturer would pay a penalty"). Also, in case of friendly nations like China, the "always sign the contract with the manufacturer" point will most definitely cost more, as the government will be able provide 'friendship prices' and other flexibility if directly involved in the deal. But I agree that some of the points you mentioned should definitely be demanded, regardless of their cost (for example, "no delivery no money").
Hi PAFace,
Your post is assumptous---this is how major purchases are made---specially keeping in view the relationship of pakistan and america. It is a standard practise in the U S to penalize the contractor if any project that is not completed in time----ok---on the other hand they may have a clause giving them a reward if the job is done ahead of time.
This is the american way of contract. Simple and brutal---the contractor has to come up with guarantees. In case of the pakistani procurement of CN 235 airplanes---there was a delay in the delivery so some planes---they obviuosly were fined as per the contractual clause.
The issue is not with china---the issue being discussed was the u s.
Boeing pays penalties for not delivering passenger planes in time---so does the airbus consortium.