Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Calif. could lose millions in Oracle deal-audit
Reuters ^ | April 17 | Reuters

Posted on 04/17/2002 5:41:24 PM PDT by Bush2000

SACRAMENTO, Calif., April 17 — A potentially illegal deal between Oracle Corp. (NASDAQ:ORCL) and California could cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars for software that few state employees need or want, the state auditor said Wednesday.

In a highly critical review, a state audit questioned why officials in three state agencies went ahead with the $122.6 million no-bid deal last May when a survey indicated few state workers had interest in using the database software.

"We didn't know if there was a need and we committed millions of dollars to this contract," said State Auditor Elaine Howle told Reuters.

The agreement between Oracle and the Department of Finance, the Department of Information Technology and the Department of General Services was aimed at saving taxpayers money by entering into a long-term 10-year contract and purchasing the software in a large quantity.

But the audit issued Tuesday offered a blistering review of a deal in which state negotiators worked with little legal oversight and had no idea that consultant Logicon, a unit of Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC) ,stood to reap $28 million from the deal.

The report also asked the attorney general's office to look into whether the deal was legal because it was awarded without competitive bids as well as to investigate Logicon's role as a consultant.

Representatives for the Department of Finance declined to comment, while the other state agencies and Logicon could not be immediately reached. An Oracle spokesman maintained the deal would save California as much as $163 million over the next 10 years.

"Oracle Corporation's software sale to the State of California last year allows the State, as well as local governments, to access Oracle technology at an exceptionally attractive price, said Oracle spokesman Steve Perkins.

But the state audit revealed that almost a year into the contract the three departments are still figuring out how to pay for the software, and that as of mid-March no state workers were using the product.

Howle said the state stood to lose tens of millions of dollars on the deal, one of the most questionable she has reviewed during 18 years at the Bureau of State audits.

According to the review, Logicon used "shaky" assumptions in calculating the state savings, and auditors say taxpayers could end up doling out $41 million more than if they had bought the software separately.

"We came up with significantly different numbers," Howle said. "The disparity in the number were enormous and as we said they were grossly overstated."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Technical; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; ellison; illegal; oracle; scumbag; techindex
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
If the deal was illegal, the contract can be invalidated.
1 posted on 04/17/2002 5:41:24 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tech_index
bump
2 posted on 04/17/2002 5:41:44 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
God knows, Larry Ellison wouldn't break the law, would he? I mean ... he cares ... right?
3 posted on 04/17/2002 5:42:12 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Davis again, no doubt.

Drip ... drip ...

4 posted on 04/17/2002 5:46:11 PM PDT by fire and forget
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
So Mr. Larry "Anti-Monopoly" Ellison benefitted from an illegal deal? I'm shocked.
5 posted on 04/17/2002 5:59:58 PM PDT by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Mmmm, let me guess. Larry Ellison made a nice financial contribution to Gray Davis? That's the only way Davis operates. Sort of like...prostitution, wouldn't you say?
6 posted on 04/17/2002 6:04:41 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldenstategirl
And just how else do you think Oracle has stayed in business for so long, by producing a good database product? AAAAAhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaa

Sorry... ;0)

7 posted on 04/17/2002 6:14:33 PM PDT by Chad Fairbanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
Well, I guess that explains all those government workers who keep saying "Wait a minute, I just can't get this computer to work......um, uh, it's slow........."
8 posted on 04/17/2002 6:23:40 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
I look forward to an Increase in my Cigarette Taxes to pay for this Gaffe............<=======Sarcasm
9 posted on 04/17/2002 6:25:15 PM PDT by Pagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Here's the original article, way back in august:

California let rules slide in Oracle contract

10 posted on 04/17/2002 6:30:09 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldenstategirl
I'm suspicious about Ellison but Oracle's overall corporate and employees' contributions are around 4R:1D.
11 posted on 04/17/2002 7:19:30 PM PDT by hitthefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goldenstategirl
Personally, I'd put some role reversal in that statement... The computer is saying, "I can't get these government workers to work... they're um... slow..."

Tee hee ;0)

12 posted on 04/17/2002 8:04:56 PM PDT by Chad Fairbanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
First off, it seems that if anybody is crooked in this deal, it's Northrop/Grumman.

Secondly, I'm interested in the point about software that "few state employees need or want." Oracle isn't desktop software, and many people could be using it without even knowing it.

It actually does sound like they got a good deal. They should have followed the rules to get it though.

13 posted on 04/17/2002 9:57:29 PM PDT by mykej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mykej
a survey indicated few state workers had interest in using the database software.

They're talking about IT departments throughout the state, not individual workers.
14 posted on 04/17/2002 11:50:15 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
A-HaHaHaHa!

(bump)
15 posted on 04/18/2002 12:34:59 AM PDT by Rate_Determining_Step
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
A similar situation exists here in Colorado. Oracle has their greedy hands on the nads of our governor and his CIO.
16 posted on 04/18/2002 8:51:16 AM PDT by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Oh, yeah, the punch line: The state developers do NOT want Oracle! They want SQL Server 2000. Oracle is slow and cumbersome to work with, and each project they do has a budget that Oracle wipes out. Many projects budgets are in the $300,000 or less range, with many in the $30,000 range. The starting price for the usual Oracle configuration is $69,000. The average price range for a similar SQL Server configuration is $4,000 to $12,000.

Bill "Gun Control" Owens, a RINO, has a mandate for all state databases to migrate to Oracle within another four years. Wonder why? Of course, the managers with $4 million Informix installations ain't moving. They gave the Oracle idea the finger.

Another funny thing is that SQL Server doesn’t need an army of DBAs to make it work. As a matter of fact, Microsoft Consulting Services doesn’t do all that much work with the state because there is no need. SQL Server can work without high priced expertise, and Microsoft has many decent partners here to handle the load. Oracle requires an army of expensive developers, and they push them onto the state. Oracle's plan isn't doing so well as the state employees prefer SQL Server.

17 posted on 04/18/2002 9:05:40 AM PDT by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
HEY NOW!!!

We're working hard, in between FReepin', of course!

;-)

18 posted on 04/18/2002 9:08:14 AM PDT by BornOnTheFourth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
In a highly critical review, a state audit questioned why officials in three state agencies went ahead with the $122.6 million no-bid deal last May when a survey indicated few state workers had interest in using the database software.

They got it because it isn't Microsoft. It doesn't matter that no one uses or wants it, they're going to get it anyway, by God, and they'd better shut up and like it!

Heh. It'd be kind of nice if this came and bit them all in the hieny.

Tuor

19 posted on 04/18/2002 9:36:13 AM PDT by Tuor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrioticAmerican
And, from a developer's point of view, when it comes to resources such as developer tools and documentation at a decent price, SQL Server wins against Oracle hands down...
20 posted on 04/18/2002 11:32:59 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson