News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Pentagon’s $52,000 trash can by mda on Friday June 23, 2023 @09:30AM (#36446587)
"But simply saying "if prices look high to me it must mean corruption" is very naive."

Naive or not, this turns out to be true surprisingly frequently.

Re:The Pentagon’s $52,000 trash can by throwaway290 on Friday June 23, 2023 @10:08AM (#36447023)
This is the money quote you can use to argue this is actually corruption:

> When the 707 fell out of use in the United States, the trash can was no longer a “commercial” item, meaning that Boeing was not obligated to keep its price at previous levels

So now one can look why it cost "mere" $300 before, unless Boeing losing money back then the price hike may be shady behavior and then someone should change supplier asap.

Re:The Pentagon’s $52,000 trash can by hef19898 on Friday June 23, 2023 @11:10AM (#36447922)
Single source supplier tend to have incresible bargaining power. And 50k per E-3 propably isn't even worth mentioning for everyone involved. Peanuts, actually.
Re:The Pentagon’s $52,000 trash can by throwaway290 on Friday June 23, 2023 @02:07PM (#36450312)
"The sum is low enough so it's not corruption" is also naive. Another side of the same coin