Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video here.
You mean in the article that the tweet links to?
It s incorrect in the heading as you mention, but correct in the side bar further down.
The market cap in the heading is also wrong.
There’s just one word to cover it: incompetence.
I don’t know if anyone noticed, but KoolKat15 was playing tag-team along with sneckieboy and bluenose back on March 15th/16th. That thread which got deleted, I think. No wonder he got confused when he had *three* accounts!
Yes Utah, you really are missing something. And so are others.
The lab used was certified when Sareum commenced trials. But by the time the CTA went in, the lab wasn't certified any more. Its that simple. That's why a GLP review was suggested.
Dessie, I’m going to have to stop because you’re drawing me into a conversation on what I do for a day job!
Anyway, as it happens I checked my aircraft carrier arrestor cable this morning and it’s all fine and in tolerance. But thanks for the offer anyway. LOL.
:) :)
I was looking for this link which is a better illustration of the Queensferry crossing project:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-45041862
Contrast with this which is a terrible council procurement example, awarded without any competitive tendering!
https://www.southhams-today.co.uk/news/south-hams-district-council-reach-mutual-agreement-to-end-fcc-contract-554630
Many MoD contracts are “open book” to avoid exactly that happening.
What happens in government procurement is that quotes are done and orders placed on a basic, sometimes incomplete, specification. Then during the project lifecycle, change requests are raised. Some have a small or minimal impact, some considerable. This is necessary on complex procurements otherwise the design and quotation process would take forever. Accordingly, competitive tendering often results on the basic specification being delivered at cost with the margin being built in to the change requests.
I’ve worked on large government procurement programmes for nearly 30yrs.
This is a bit of a generalisation, but it’s a fairly realistic appraisal of many large programmes, and I’ve worked on many up to the value of about £17Bn.
There’s many processes and practises which control costs - some of them good, some bad. I can’t tell you much about ones I’ve worked on as that would be subject to NDA and other controls, but I can tell you that the abandonment of the NHS data sharing across regions was a costly disaster which started with a decent overall strategy, but the purchasing negotiation was terrible. Contrast that to the building of the Queensferry crossing - a project that went to plan, on time and on budget, an absolute triumph for the Scottish government. Here’s one of the linked projects: https://web.archive.org/web/20130607093856/http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/news/FRC-junction-early-and-under-budget
Hmmmm…. Q1 might be a clue.
Remember the statement (either Tim or John, I can’t remember) along the lines of “the lab was definitely certified when we initiated testing with them. It seems that the certification is no longer valid at the time of the CTA submission”.
Ten bonus points if you can work out the most likely reason for that?
Shout if you need another clue.
Silver foil - I used to be a member of a planning advocacy and campaign group that fought many planning applications. Some of the members were experts at letters of representation and used knowledge of policy & frameworks to get planning refused. My expertise was in campaigning and putting pressure on developers to limit the damage of developments that attempted to expand and change after outline planning had been granted.
If outline planning has been granted, there’s often very little anyone can do. Detail planning and “reserved matters” are usually a formality unless you mount a very strong challenge.
I doubt that solicitors will be much us for anything other than taking your money.
Silver foil - a politically savvy question for you - ask yourself why a Conservative MP would want to stick his fingers into a planning matter when the council is Conservative led, the planning committee is Conservative led and vice-chaired?
You don’t defeat planning applications that way. You defeat planning matters on challenging the application on policy and material considerations.