Thai Govt Delays Computer Tablet Deal-Signing As Deadline Guarantee Missed

[bigbamboo]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

I doubt Abhisit would have even considered anything so ridiculous.

[slapout]

It is not a big secret, that some of the heavyweights within the government would like to be placed with another Chinese company: HUAWEI, for the usual obvious reasons=big kickbacks. So don't be surprised, when after a number of excuses the government decides to change surplier, to, yes you guessed it, HUAWEI.

The accusation of payoffs is bullsh*t. Huawei has an excellent reputation and we have indirectly dealt with them. No payoffs, no bribes, just professionalism.

many of the comments in this thrad are incredibly ignorant. The government's decision not to sign is based upon responsible management. The supplier ccould not provide the performance guarantee as required under the contract. The comments in this thread slamming the government for not signing also show that commentators haven't the slightest clue as to how large contracts are managed. It is SOP procedure for a client in a large procurement to request and obtain performance bonds. The bond ensures that a third party will provide the funding to complete or perform the signed contract. The bond can be replaced by a direct financial guarantee and that is what the government did. The government has behaved in a responsible and prudent manner in this regard.

Any company or government that would sign a contract when a supplier was unable to comply with the performance bonding or financial guarantee would have alot of explaining to do. Why then are some people making idiotic comments as to the government screwing up for not signing? The governmsnt did the right thing.

A bid bond is the usual requirement to make the formal bid, this is in turn changed to a performance bond by the supplier upon awarding of the bid. When the purchaser changes terms of delivery, number of widgets he wants, deliver times, etc it is hard to approach any financial institution for a performance bond until all T's are crossed and I's dotted.To expect. With at least two ministries and god knows how many other sticking their nose in from the Thai side, some people will have to learn how business is conducted in the outside world. It would seem we have another example of people working way above their compentance level.

[Route21]

I though it was the buyer that had to produce a "Bank-garanti, for the seller to be sure he get paid.

Only in the normal world.

Ohps! Yes sure, I forgot.

Thanks for reminding me.

I think what you are referring to is what we call a "Letter of Credit", which the buyer (particularly in the case of international deals) may have to provide to guarantee payment.

What the supplier may have to provide is called a "(Bid or Contract) Performance Bank Guarantee".

If the bidder/contractor doesn't perform, the buyer can cash the "Performance Bond", which compensates the buyer for the incremental delay and cost associated with going to another (higher) bidder. The buyer normally doesn't need to actually "pull" the bond but merely suggest to the erring bidder/contractor that, if they don't sort out their performance, they are putting their Bank Guarantee/bond at significant risk.

If that doesn't get their top management's attention then either the value of the bond is too low or you are contracting with the wrong company!

Hope this helps

R21

[tlansford]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

I doubt Abhisit would have even considered anything so ridiculous.

ah, perhaps, but if he had?

After all, the dems mimicked almost every populist proposal of the PTP is some way.

But my point is still the same, The Nation doesn't like the idea, therefore, the gov't holding the supplier to their obligations becomes the government misses a deadline.

Hardly worth printing.

But now it would be interesting if they would do a series of articles on topics concerning the procurement process, or a series of reports on how schools are preparing for the tablets, or a series on the opportunity costs of projects in the education system...

But they don't ever reach for that level of journalism. It is not their real calling.

[bigbamboo]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

I doubt Abhisit would have even considered anything so ridiculous.

ah, perhaps, but if he had?

After all, the dems mimicked almost every populist proposal of the PTP is some way.

But my point is still the same, The Nation doesn't like the idea, therefore, the gov't holding the supplier to their obligations becomes the government misses a deadline.

Hardly worth printing.

But now it would be interesting if they would do a series of articles on topics concerning the procurement process, or a series of reports on how schools are preparing for the tablets, or a series on the opportunity costs of projects in the education system...

But they don't ever reach for that level of journalism. It is not their real calling.

Wouldn't argue with that. Maybe they should seek the help of Drew Noyes?

[Route21]

It is not a big secret, that some of the heavyweights within the government would like to be placed with another Chinese company: HUAWEI, for the usual obvious reasons=big kickbacks. So don't be surprised, when after a number of excuses the government decides to change surplier, to, yes you guessed it, HUAWEI.

It is SOP procedure for a client in a large procurement to request and obtain performance bonds. The bond ensures that a third party will provide the funding to complete or perform the signed contract. The bond can be replaced by a direct financial guarantee and that is what the government did. The government has behaved in a responsible and prudent manner in this regard.

Any company or government that would sign a contract when a supplier was unable to comply with the performance bonding or financial guarantee would have a lot of explaining to do. ......... The government did the right thing.

After around 20 years with clients involved in large scale procurement, I agree!

R21

PS I understand that the government haven't actually said they are not going to sign with Scope, just that they can't do so unless and until Scope comes up with the Bond. I would have done the same.

[Skywalker69]

I though it was the buyer that had to produce a "Bank-garanti, for the seller to be sure he get paid.

Only in the normal world.

Ohps! Yes sure, I forgot.

Thanks for reminding me.

I think what you are referring to is what we call a "Letter of Credit", which the buyer (particularly in the case of international deals) may have to provide to guarantee payment.

What the supplier may have to provide is called a "(Bid or Contract) Performance Bank Guarantee".

If the bidder/contractor doesn't perform, the buyer can cash the "Performance Bond", which compensates the buyer for the incremental delay and cost associated with going to another (higher) bidder. The buyer normally doesn't need to actually "pull" the bond but merely suggest to the erring bidder/contractor that, if they don't sort out their performance, they are putting their Bank Guarantee/bond at significant risk.

If that doesn't get their top management's attention then either the value of the bond is too low or you are contracting with the wrong company!

Hope this helps

R21

Thanks for your information.

[Thaddeus]

I though it was the buyer that had to produce a "Bank-garanti, for the seller to be sure he get paid.

Only in the normal world.

Ohps! Yes sure, I forgot.

Thanks for reminding me.

I think what you are referring to is what we call a "Letter of Credit", which the buyer (particularly in the case of international deals) may have to provide to guarantee payment.

What the supplier may have to provide is called a "(Bid or Contract) Performance Bank Guarantee".

If the bidder/contractor doesn't perform, the buyer can cash the "Performance Bond", which compensates the buyer for the incremental delay and cost associated with going to another (higher) bidder. The buyer normally doesn't need to actually "pull" the bond but merely suggest to the erring bidder/contractor that, if they don't sort out their performance, they are putting their Bank Guarantee/bond at significant risk.

If that doesn't get their top management's attention then either the value of the bond is too low or you are contracting with the wrong company!

Hope this helps

R21

Thanks from me too, every day is a school day.

[thaicbr]

personally if I was dealing with any Thai government. I would ask for ALL the money upfront. possibly the only way to get paid everything owed.

[bigbamboo]

personally if I was dealing with any Thai government. I would ask for ALL the money upfront. possibly the only way to get paid everything owed.

Think yourself lucky if you don't get paid in Thai chicken.

Edited April 6, 2012 by bigbamboo

[pipo1000]

But now it would be interesting if they would do a series of articles on topics concerning the procurement process, or a series of reports on how schools are preparing for the tablets, or a series on the opportunity costs of projects in the education system...

But they don't ever reach for that level of journalism. It is not their real calling.

I guess they better refrain from printing articles on those topics because that would be a real loss of face for PTP.

Imagine articles about schools without electricity preparing for the tablets.

Opportunity costs of projects in the education system?You probably mean opportunity of backhanders don't you?

The procurement process has had a few articles already,but it shows out that no one of this government knows what they are talking about since they contradict each other continiously with every announcement.

[pipo1000]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

Abhisit didn't have such ridiculous ideas,that kind of ideas are sole properietorship of the Shinawatra clan.

You remember their previous promise, one child one laptop.Did actually one single child get a laptop?

[bigbamboo]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

Abhisit didn't have such ridiculous ideas,that kind of ideas are sole properietorship of the Shinawatra clan.

You remember their previous promise, one child one laptop.Did actually one single child get a laptop?

They also said they were just 'election promises'. They may have meant (literally) one child...one laptop. Just have to find that child.

Edited April 6, 2012 by bigbamboo

[pipo1000]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

Abhisit didn't have such ridiculous ideas,that kind of ideas are sole properietorship of the Shinawatra clan.

You remember their previous promise, one child one laptop.Did actually one single child get a laptop?

They also said they were just 'election promises'. They may have meant (literally) one child...one laptop. Just have to find that child.

Found him already

[PoodMaiDai]

Seriously, who cares?

How about spending the money getting better teachers. With or without tablets, most of those kids are screwed.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

The accusation of payoffs is bullsh*t. Huawei has an excellent reputation and we have indirectly dealt with them. No payoffs, no bribes, just professionalism.

Well, Huawei certainly has been in the news lately for other reasons.... From what I briefly heard, the company supposedly has a bunch of ex Chinese military officials in senior positions, which is creating concern in the west. This from Forbes:

03/30/2012

Security Concerns Still Dog Huawei and ZTE in U.S. and Australia

China's export superstars Huawei and ZTE continue to face new obstacles in their quest for global legitimacy, with the former receiving a major setback in Australia as the latter comes under fire for dealings in the problematic Iranian market.

Those developments reflect the uphill battle that both companies face in the eyes of western leaders, many of whom believe that these 2 telecoms equipment giants are little more than spying arms of Beijing. In the latest of a steady stream of setbacks for Huawei, Australia has officially disqualified the company from bidding for contracts to build a new $38 billion high-speed broadband network over security concerns.

A frustrated Huawei disclosed the rejection, but top-level Australian officials, when questioned on the matter, were quite direct about their security concerns surrounding construction of a new National Broadband Network that aims to connect more than 90 percent of the country's homes and offices with fiber optic cable by 2020. Australia's Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said outright that the decision was consistent with the country's national security policy, and Prime Minister Julia Gillard, when questioned by reporters at an unrelated event, called the decision a "prudent" one.

This latest rejection comes just five months after Huawei was disqualified from another bid to help upgrade emergency telecoms networks in the US. In that case no reason was given, but the clear implication was that security concerns were a major factor.

http://www.forbes.co...-and-australia/

Edited April 6, 2012 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

BTW, there have been several news reports in recent months on the huge numbers of Thai public schools, I presume mostly upcountry, that have neither electricity at all or even air conditioning.

As someone mentioned above, I keep wondering what those couple of thousand schools, if memory serves, are going to do about charging their [perhaps} newly deployed toys.

[hellodolly]

I wonder which of the 2 parties dosen't have their Documents Ready!!!!!! Does anyone want to wager which party that is?????????????????????????????????????????

Thailand's Government should really try hard to not always make excuses, coz I am sure the other party has children of their own at home they

have to deal with.

If betting wasn't illegal I'd take you on

The ministry informed the Chinese supplier in the afternoon that the Office of the Attorney-General had just finished its review of the contract and asked the company to prepare the documents to complete the deal.

However, the Chinese manufacturer could not get a standby guarantee for 5 per cent of the project value by the deadline, he said.

If betting in Thailand was legal I would bet the family jewels it is the PT holding it back

[hellodolly]

I though it was the buyer that had to produce a "Bank-garanti, for the seller to be sure he get paid.

Only in the normal world.

Absolutely not. It is a performance guarantee. The client would call upon the financial guarantee in the event the supplier failed to meet the supply contract.

Bonding is a financial undertaking and can be replaced by a more specific financial instrument. It is also used as a verification as to the "quality" of a project. if a third party guarantor does not provide the bond or financial guarantee, it means that the third party has some concerns. This is what you people should focus on. What are the concerns? It usually means that the supplier may not have the financial strength to support the undertaking or it may not have demonstrated an ability to meet its obligations in the contract. The requirement is an essential risk management tool.

if anyone doubts me on this, then please go and ask someone who has signed a large contract for the provision of goods and services. The Bangkok airport, subway and city link projects all had similar performance requirements for bonding or financial guarantees.

Well it is definitely not my field but common sense tells me that 5% guarantee is not a heck of a lot. Especially on a multi billion Baht deal. That amount is right next door to why bother.

[hellodolly]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

The Government gave no time dead line. It just promised all students would have a tablet. Considering how long it took them to get three G the time line would probably have a dead line of 2025 And yes it has missed the time it was to be delivered to a select few. First of April I believe.

[meand]

Seriously, who cares?

How about spending the money getting better teachers. With or without tablets, most of those kids are screwed.

I agree. At least they will all be familiar with operating tablets though. But yes, many/most of the kids here are screwed, some quite a bit more literally than others.

[Thaddeus]

So, of course The Nation doesn't like the tablet program (probably just because it was proposed by the PTP, imagine if it had been Abhisit's idea...),

but none the less, it is amazing how they can take (in post #4) the government's act of due diligence and turn it into "the government will miss its tablet deadline"...

Abhisit didn't have such ridiculous ideas,that kind of ideas are sole properietorship of the Shinawatra clan.

You remember their previous promise, one child one laptop.Did actually one single child get a laptop?

They also said they were just 'election promises'. They may have meant (literally) one child...one laptop. Just have to find that child.

Found him already

My god, that's so thin you can see right through it.

(just like election promises)

[letitbe]

If they are clever they will pull out of the deal - who wants to go into business with someone that with a very minimal time-frame makes demands and then publicly blames you for delays because of it?

Unless the tablets are overpriced junk-clones and the whole sale is a scam, ofcourse...

No reason to be negetive. Let's hope for the best.

If they are clever they will pull out of the deal - who wants to go into business with someone that with a very minimal time-frame makes demands and then publicly blames you for delays because of it?

Unless the tablets are overpriced junk-clones and the whole sale is a scam, ofcourse...

No reason to be negetive. Let's hope for the best.

its impossible to have a brain and not be negative with this bunch of clowns Its a total farce and within 1 year will either be totally forgotten or endless excuses rolled out to keep saving face and to keep scam money coming in. Every thai person knows this even this lots supporters.

[Thaddeus]

its impossible to have a brain and not be negative with this bunch of clowns

In the context of TVF that has to be the most accurate and inaccurate post of the decade.

[WackySomchai]

It is not a big secret, that some of the heavyweights within the government would like to be placed with another Chinese company: HUAWEI, for the usual obvious reasons=big kickbacks. So don't be surprised, when after a number of excuses the government decides to change surplier, to, yes you guessed it, HUAWEI.

The accusation of payoffs is bullsh*t. Huawei has an excellent reputation and we have indirectly dealt with them. No payoffs, no bribes, just professionalism.

many of the comments in this thrad are incredibly ignorant. The government's decision not to sign is based upon responsible management. The supplier ccould not provide the performance guarantee as required under the contract. The comments in this thread slamming the government for not signing also show that commentators haven't the slightest clue as to how large contracts are managed. It is SOP procedure for a client in a large procurement to request and obtain performance bonds. The bond ensures that a third party will provide the funding to complete or perform the signed contract. The bond can be replaced by a direct financial guarantee and that is what the government did. The government has behaved in a responsible and prudent manner in this regard.

Any company or government that would sign a contract when a supplier was unable to comply with the performance bonding or financial guarantee would have alot of explaining to do. Why then are some people making idiotic comments as to the government screwing up for not signing? The governmsnt did the right thing.

I can see that you don't know much about the business ethics at Huawei and other major Chinese companies. A quick google search will enlighten you ...

Edited April 6, 2012 by WackySomchai

[Route21]

Well it is definitely not my field but common sense tells me that 5% guarantee is not a heck of a lot. Especially on a multi billion Baht deal. That amount is right next door to why bother.

A Bank Guarantee of 5-15% is quite normal in international contracting. The higher the value of the contract, the more likely the guarantee would be set towards the lower end.

As posted earlier, once the value of the bond is large enough to get the bidder/contractor's top management attention, the law of diminishing returns starts to apply. If it's too high you may also reduce the competitive forces in the bidding, as potential bidders shy away from the increased exposure. Bear in mind that any bidder/contractor is probably bidding/contracting to other clients with similar high valued contracts. Their potential financial exposure to having any one (or more) of their high value bank guarantees encashed, across all bids/contracts, could therefore be quite high.

In this context, bear in mind the domino effect on security concerns with potential Chinese IT suppliers, as noted in others posts.

Regards

R21

PS Bonds should not be encashed arbitrarily. To do so could cause you to lose any reputation you might have had as a responsible potential client - once bitten, twice shy!

[Jimjim]

Stupid election promise to begin with, but that's politics I suppose.

[Markaew]

Remember my post from a monthe ago

Posted 2012-03-18 10:30:05

Watch my words, they will delay and delay this project untill they find the perfect excuse to cancel the whole project.

My bet is on a quality issue.

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__5143495

We're getting closer and closer to that stage of the fake election promises program.

A friend of mine bought a tablet from China. I don't remember the brand but it was clearly sub-standard. Not 100% functional.

[thaicbr]

personally if I was dealing with any Thai government. I would ask for ALL the money upfront. possibly the only way to get paid everything owed.

Think yourself lucky if you don't get paid in Thai chicken.

actually I already do get paid in Thai chicken. at least partly free lunch is part of my contract and we have chicken at least twice a week.

[volk666]

Two articles on the success of the good old One Laptop per Child, or OLPC project, a world wide program initiated years ago. Even Thailand had run a trial once, in Samak times, if I remember correctly. The current One Tablet Per Child (ten children, actually) program is an evolution of that same project. OLPC itself is preparing to release the tablet version of their hundred dollar laptops.

http://arstechnica.c...ning-begins.ars

http://www.economist.../node/21552202/

In short - there are many signs of progress after running these OLPC machines in number of countries for a few years - computer literacy, internet penetration, public access to free wifi and so on. There's only one area that didn't see any improvements at all - education itself.

Using these computers on a daily basis at schools had no effect on children's math or reading skills. a

Granted, people might object to using "old" testing methods and point out at problems at the implementation stage that could be corrected, like proper teacher education. To this I can reply that you can solve problems with proper teacher education without buying computers or tablets, ie presence of technology does not address problems in education. It rather wastes time on wild goose chases that divert resources from applying them where they are really needed.

Edited April 8, 2012 by volk666