Why does the military purchase the same products at a much higher price than what's offered in the civilian sector?

ENS Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:49:37 -0400

Let's take a look at Office Max: A swivel chair that costs $200 to buy online for personal use as a civilian costs $700 to buy online for military use.. What is the reason behind this?

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Aug 14 at 2016 4:57 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 16:57:08 -0400

Why does the military spend so much more than civilians for the same products and services? Simple. They're not spending their money. They're spending OPM (Other People's Money)

Response by PFC Al Sethre made Aug 14 at 2016 5:23 PM

PFC Al Sethre — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 17:23:55 -0400

A small business can offer up to 30% more than the next closest large business bid and still win the contract. Every agency has small business goals when it comes to procurement, the more money they give to a small business, the closer they get to meeting those goals.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Aug 14 at 2016 6:53 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:53:22 -0400

Two Words "Military Standard" or MILSTD. Requirements that are just ridiculous but required for equipment that we are to use. It has to survive in Temps and Pressures that are only found out in space sometimes. It is just Insane. I did like when we were authorized to make off the shelf purchases. Even got some better more unique equipment and a far cheaper price.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Aug 14 at 2016 8:29 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:29:59 -0400

Regulations and specifications.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2016 1:33 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 01:33:12 -0400

Because everyone wants to bend Uncle Sugar over.

Response by SCPO Jason McLaughlin made Aug 15 at 2016 5:26 AM

SCPO Jason McLaughlin — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 05:26:41 -0400

Late careerist military people write specifications that are so specific they can only be met by the company that is going to hire them when they retire.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2016 9:40 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:40:04 -0400

Mandated purchasing. We have to purchase from small businesses, women owned businesses, disabled veteran owned businesses, minority owned businesses, etc. before going to larger companies. That does not always equate to cheapest price. In fact, it never seems to.

Go to gsaadvantage.gsa.gov and look at buying something. When the list of vendors comes up that offer the product you selected, the caveats are listed as well so you can see the 'disadvantage' that business has (socio economic indicators)
https://www.gsaadvantage.gov/advantage/information/page.do?keyName=BUSINESS_IND

Socio-Economic Indicators

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2016 10:09 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:09:32 -0400

Welcome to the never-ending loop of government spending... Wait, did anyone say F-35?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2016 1:02 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:02:49 -0400

Another thing to look at is who is in charge of bids for contracts just as an example of wasted money. A group of DOD employees under direction of a Senate Committee are authorized to negotiate a contract with Military Supply Company A. Company A gives them an estimated price with some ups or downs potentially noted. The contract is approved and production begins. Then somewhere along the line production costs sky rocket and demand can't be met on time.

It is at this point that an investigation by DOD/DOJ with Congressional authority should be done. Did Company A purposely attempt to defraud the Government by increasing prices and delaying production? If no is Company A incompetent or just not capable of fulfilling the order? If yes then should charges be brought up and the contract negated and a new supplier such as Company B be found?

This doesn't happen though, we stick with out contracts and the devil we know. To be honest I was surprised when the Army declined to continue buying mullticam when they marked up the price and switched to OCP instead. Doesn't seem to be the way we usually do things.

Long story short though, everyone knows Uncle Sugar is good for the money and that likely they will pay rather than fight the mark up. We really need a high speed team of finance and legal to assist in these purchases for DOD and any of the branches in my opinion.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Aug 16 at 2016 1:41 PM

Cpl Justin Goolsby — Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:41:43 -0400

Ridiculous government contracts made instead of utilizing common sense. I worked in an office environment and the biggest demand items were printer ink. Our printer would literally not function if even 1 color was empty. Through the military channels, one cartridge costs about 450 bucks. In store and online, you can get it for just under 100 bucks. Nothing pissed me off than being forced to go through all the government channels just for the most basic supplies to do my daily job.

Response by SR Kenneth Beck made Jun 9 at 2021 10:17 AM

SR Kenneth Beck — Wed, 09 Jun 2021 10:17:10 -0400

The item purchased for the military may require extensive testing and quality control. These items may be required to be “mil-grade” or “sub-safe”.
I found the same to be true of commercial nuclear reactor “safety related” components.
I can’t discount stupidity or corruption.