If they booked 0 in revenue but helped other agencies save money by lower procurement cost or generate revenue, is that a problem?
Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
71–80 of 219 posts
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#72I don't care if 18F makes money, and in some cases it may make sense for them not to. In a perfect market, they would be able to sell their services at the same price as the value of those services. So if they build a system for the Veterans Administration (VA) that saves $1 million, they should get $1 million for it. Their EOY revenue would reflect their value created. But they are actually selling to themselves. Th…
Yep. Revenue really isn't a useful metric for an organization like this. They may save the entire government money even if they are recording losses on their own balance sheet. The opportunity cost of using private contractors vs. doing the work in-house through 18F is what should be emphasized.
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#73Governments can never provide value like this, government is not a business! Sometimes this trade off is worthwhile. I'd like to have my housefire put out in a timely fashion. I will sacrifice some of my income for this. However, the idea that the government can become some kind of silicon valley startup is just absurd. I can't believe as taxpayers we are forced at gunpoint to fund these ridiculous ideas. And people…
This is actually intended as a cost-saving measure. Government IT is enormously snarled. Quite a lot of money is spent on outdated systems and giant contracts with enormous overruns. Very few people with serious technical chops actually want to work for the government as a lifetime career choice.
The theory of 18F is that you bring in high-grade technical talent for 2-4 year stints. You have them jump in to help unsnarl knotty problems, using approaches that are obvious to we Silicon Valley types but not widely adopted in government IT circles.
I know all this because a couple of years back I interviewed with them. I decided to stay in private industry, as I didn't want to leave SF. But they have a lot of really smart and dedicated people who want to change the way the US government does technology, making it faster, cheaper, and more effective.
So I think the real question is not, "How much was spent?" but "How much did they save?" That's a harder question to answer, but I think it's the only real way to evaluate 18F as an initiative.
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#74I don't care if 18F makes money, and in some cases it may make sense for them not to. In a perfect market, they would be able to sell their services at the same price as the value of those services. So if they build a system for the Veterans Administration (VA) that saves $1 million, they should get $1 million for it. Their EOY revenue would reflect their value created. But they are actually selling to themselves. Th…
18F is another money grab. A bunch of SV people said to themselves, here is an easy few years to make money and if nothing comes of it we can say "Ah well start up culture...lol". I never had high hopes of this, it's sad that it was touted as a startup. 99% of start ups fail over the course of 5 years....
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meh. I'm sure google spent millions on their logo change, and it was just a font tweak. Hackernews was gushing. God knows what they spend per week on google doodles. There's no winning here for 18f. Either their sites are archaic disasters and they are criticized for not being up to par with the top tier consumer sites. Or they spend some money to bring them up to par and its "OMG! An $800 toilet seat!"
I want government sites and buildings to look like archaic disasters, because it at least implies that my tax dollars aren't being pissed away on frivolous opulence. Google can spend ten billion dollars changing their logo because they're profitable and they answer to their board & shareholders. I don't remember anyone asking me if I wanted to contribute money to a government tech startup.
Do tell. What do you think about paying the salary of FBI agents who interfere in presidential elections?
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#76Activities that can’t be billed to other agencies are another drain. One example is staff time totaling 727 hours on a logo change. The old logo was a blue square with 18F in the lower-right-hand corner. The new logo, a black square with 18F centered and a different font, wasn’t worth the time and doesn’t look as good. for anyone else curious: (new) Black Logo: https://18f.gsa.gov/assets/img/logos/18f-logo.svg (old)…
The new logo looks like something you would come up with if you needed a placeholder image for the real logo.
For the US Federal Government, it's fairly revolutionary.
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#77Activities that can’t be billed to other agencies are another drain. One example is staff time totaling 727 hours on a logo change. The old logo was a blue square with 18F in the lower-right-hand corner. The new logo, a black square with 18F centered and a different font, wasn’t worth the time and doesn’t look as good. for anyone else curious: (new) Black Logo: https://18f.gsa.gov/assets/img/logos/18f-logo.svg (old)…
And I thought 18F was supposed to be an example of government becoming more efficient.
This has to be a joke.
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#78I don't care if 18F makes money, and in some cases it may make sense for them not to. In a perfect market, they would be able to sell their services at the same price as the value of those services. So if they build a system for the Veterans Administration (VA) that saves $1 million, they should get $1 million for it. Their EOY revenue would reflect their value created. But they are actually selling to themselves. Th…
18F is another money grab. A bunch of SV people said to themselves, here is an easy few years to make money and if nothing comes of it we can say "Ah well start up culture...lol". I never had high hopes of this, it's sad that it was touted as a startup. 99% of start ups fail over the course of 5 years....
If it's a money grab, it's a badly designed one. I interviewed with 18F and would have had to take a pay cut even on a cash basis. (Government salaries are strictly limited by law.) They certainly don't give stock, and (gasp) you have to buy your own meals. So financially it's not a good deal at all.
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#79One example is staff time totaling 727 hours on a logo change. The old logo was a blue square with 18F in the lower-right-hand corner. The new logo, a black square with 18F centered and a different font, wasn’t worth the time and doesn’t look as good. How is that even possible?
727 hours is a team of 10 working for less than 2 work weeks. Or a team of 6 having a couple 1-hour meetings with other groups in addition to doing the design work. It'd be hard for any medium to large organization with an internal design team to rebrand without using hundreds of hours of staff time.
Yes, good point. What I don't get is 727 hours for that specific logo. Either way, it just stood out.
Re: Why a federal high-tech start-up is a money loser
#80LOL! Who was expecting different results ? Fatcats in DC use our money to gamble over programs and lose the money. This is not the first nor the last in fact this is the template in which major plans like Obamacare have been molded.