• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

DND's biggest problem is that TBS remembers what we told them, even when we don't.

Constant rotation of PL / PD staff and grossly insufficient information transfer every APS causes considerable damage and incurs significant delay to many, many DND projects.
I think that's why you really need core civilians in key positions to monitor those threads and avoid replacing the PM to totally change the approach mid stream, but in reality the people drafting things/correcting them (within DND and PSPC) turnover a lot as well, so it can be a challenge.

And have seen TBS submissions get changed to reflect something TBS wanted, and then changed back later when the TBS gatekeeper changed, so it's not just turnover at the PL/PD side. They seem to rotate a lot of analysts through as well as some kind of 'streamer' path, and some of them are frankly insufferable to deal with at a personal level due to arrogance. A few of them seemed like avatars of know-it-alls stuffed into a cheap suit and armed with bureaucratese who liked playing 'devils advocate' to everything, and correcting SMEs on things that they knew about from a wiki or blog post.

Collectively the government process is pretty schizophrenic, but if you want to not spend money externally while building a bureaucratic empire it's pretty efficient.
 
DND's biggest problem is that TBS remembers what we told them, even when we don't.

Constant rotation of PL / PD staff and grossly insufficient information transfer every APS causes considerable damage and incurs significant delay to many, many DND projects.
It’s definitely a factor, but the bigger factor is where the CAF’s reasonably based requirements do not align with the political desire of how and where the Government’s discretionary funds should be disbursed. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out who wins the coin toss.
 
At one time Civil Servants tended to stay with one Department through out their career . Sometime in the early 70's . It was decided that it might produce a more well rounded civil service. If they were shifted around through various departments.
I suspect that while it may done something along those lines for the individual members of the Civil Service.While it may broadened their worldview as it were.
However I suspect they would have lost a great deal of specialized knowledge that would have been gained by decades of working in the same department.
 
Last edited:
Um...

Why not just dust off the plans and build a dozen new Flower Class? They were about 940 Tons.

Put a 25mm in place of the 2 pdr Pom Pom, put a RAM launcher on the Foc'sle instead of the 4" gun. Put on a set of Mk. 32 SVTT from the 280's, give it the ability to use a towed array (use the old CANTASS that's being replaced with a new towed array) and toss on a SG-180 for main search Radar, put in a basic comm suite with Link 11/14 and some SATCOM for internet/wifi. Add in the .50 Cal Remote Weapons Stations to replace the 20mm Orelikons and add a spot to hang a RHIB instead of a long boat and you're good to go.
 
At one time Civil Servants tended to stay with one Department through out their career . Sometime in the early 70's . It was decided that it might produce a more well rounded civil service. If they were shifted around through various departments.
I suspect that while it may done something along those lines for the individual members of the Civil Service.While it may broadened their worldview as it were.
However I suspect they would have lost a great deal of specialized knowledge that would have been gained by decades of working in the same department.
At least in Ottawa there is a lot of folks just burnt out and shifting out of DND to get a reasonable pace. Because it's similar job categories lot of chances to 'deploy' doing a similar job outside of DND.

For procurement it seems particularly acute; a lot of folks get experienced as PG4s lately (basically the majority of the people doing part buys) and realize they can shift from covering 4 portfolios to just doing one by going to a different department (but staying in Ottawa).

Have lost some really good people that way, but I'm happy for them as no one likes watching people get ground down.

Not uncommon for ambitious people to do the same to climb the ladder as well by applying for acting jobs at the next level, or to just get outside the general DND roadblocks/culture.

I can definitely see the appeal, and have thought of it myself; really night and day in some cases, as some places actually listen to the SMEs they hire. And while the scope of what you are doing may be smaller, there is less internal bureaucracy so seems to have a better chance to actually get things done.
 
I always advocated for a 70/30 mix in the PS, 70% climb up the ladder within their Department and 30% are new from other Departments and outside government. That way you get new ideas and experiences, while having a solid knowledge base of what a Department does and has done. As for Ottawa, it seem only to exist for itself and vast majority of the people there seem preoccupied of switching jobs and climbing the ladder with no care about their Department or Mandate.
 
Um...

Why not just dust off the plans and build a dozen new Flower Class? They were about 940 Tons.

Put a 25mm in place of the 2 pdr Pom Pom, put a RAM launcher on the Foc'sle instead of the 4" gun. Put on a set of Mk. 32 SVTT from the 280's, give it the ability to use a towed array (use the old CANTASS that's being replaced with a new towed array) and toss on a SG-180 for main search Radar, put in a basic comm suite with Link 11/14 and some SATCOM for internet/wifi. Add in the .50 Cal Remote Weapons Stations to replace the 20mm Orelikons and add a spot to hang a RHIB instead of a long boat and you're good to go.

And ask Tom Hanks to support the idea! ;)

200.gif
 
I always advocated for a 70/30 mix in the PS, 70% climb up the ladder within their Department and 30% are new from other Departments and outside government. That way you get new ideas and experiences, while having a solid knowledge base of what a Department does and has done. As for Ottawa, it seem only to exist for itself and vast majority of the people there seem preoccupied of switching jobs and climbing the ladder with no care about their Department or Mandate.
I don't know if I would agree, there are a lot of PS here that stay in jobs longer then they really should because of commitment to the people in the Department, but are driven away by the Institution. Defence in particular is great at bringing people in by getting them hyped up about contributing to the CAF efforts as a PS, and then beating the heck out of them. I don't see much difference between Ottawa and the fleet in that respect; burnt out people all over.

The people that jump around to climb the ladder do the same thing as military careerists, and the same thing happens in private sector, so just the nature of the beast I think.
 
I refuse to believe that movie existed.

I thought it was a touching story of US/Japanese reconciliation in the face of global doom.

And a warning to anyone else who ever wanted to try it again ;)


'Battleship' Disaster Scuttles Hasbro's Plans For Board Games​



Hasbro charted the course of its board games business by way of the movie theatre. Now, after Battleship sank in its U.S. opening, Hasbro seems a bit dead in the water. Investors would do well to steer clear.

Battleship, which pitted Earth's military against an onslaught of aliens that looked like moles, took in a paltry $25.3 million and received a wide shelling by critics. Salon.com's Andrew O'Hehir called it "profoundly stupid." The New York Times likened its plot to a macaroni dinner—familiar fare but not particularly nutritious. "It's loud, it's large, it's stupid," writes the San Francisco Chronicle's Amy Biancolli, "and its best gag involves a chicken burrito."

Hasbro (HAS, $34.24) was never on the hook for the film's budget. The world's second biggest toymaker licensed the 45-year-old game to Universal, a General Electric company, and collected the fee. Bankrolling the movie fell to the studio, and in all, it cost some where far north of $209 million to make and market. The film may not plunge Universal into red ink, though, thanks to a smart decision to roll it out overseas before American critics could torpedo it. Battleship grossed $215 million by the time it opened this past weekend, making its Stateside flop a touch more tolerable.

Still, the film's box-office folly means it won't buoy the sales of the actual board game as hoped. Moreover, it casts doubt on Hasbro's plans to make film versions of some remaining games in its toy box—classics like Candyland, Ouija, Clue and Monopoly. Anticipation for both the tie-in revenues and the actual films has run high. (Rumors placed Oscar-winning director Ridley Scott in talks to helm the Monopoly film. Other speculation centered on whether Clue would indeed receive a remake.) Had Battleship steamed through theaters, Hasbro's fortunes would appear quite brighter. But why make more films when the tentpole production floundered so noticeably? The failure leaves a lot of money on the table, piled up like penalty cash on Free Parking. Revenue that would come with bringing Gum Drop Mountain and Mr. Boddy's mansion to the big screen is in jeopardy.

The idea for these movies started when Hasbro's Transformers toys became three blockbuster films. The movies boosted sales in its boys division, which includes Transformers and other toys like G.I. Joe, and its entertainment and licensing business. Hasbro then rolled the dice, hoping that films could also boost the sagging sales of its board games, its second largest business by revenue. Board game sales have experienced six straight quarters of year-over-year declines. Annual sales have dropped 13% in two years to barely $1.2 billion in 2011.

Further, both Mr. Boddy and Mr. Moneybags seem quite the elderly gentleman. Analysts have criticized Hasbro for its slow movement into digital games. Without Hasbro's Scrabble, there is no Words With Friends. But today, Words with Friends attracts 17.6 million active users each month, according to Appdata.com. Scrabble sees fewer than 1 million.

Investors may be lured into Hasbro because of its valuation. At 10.9 times forward earnings, Hasbro is significantly below both its five-year average P/E and the industry average. Remember though that the stock has lost nearly 28% in the last year, and dropped 5% in the past month. Investors should see a red flare in that alone. Chief rival Mattel goes for just a hair more, at 11.8 times forward earnings, and has outperformed lately, climbing 12% during the past 12 months. Another competitor, Jakks Pacific, is more expensive, 14 times forward earnings, after shares jumped 32% this year on takeover talk.

Others buyers see Hasbro as a smart dividend play. Certainly, it's a frequent holding in many dividend funds. It pays out a 4.2% yield, more than double the benchmark 10-year Treasury yield. It ended 2011 with $642 million in cash, about $5 a share. Still, Hasbro's free cash flow is far from recent highs and fluctuated quite a bit: It went from $476 million in 2008 to $297 million last year.

Jumping ship on Hasbro seems the savviest move.

 
Moreover, it casts doubt on Hasbro's plans to make film versions of some remaining games in its toy box—classics like Candyland, Ouija, Clue and Monopoly.

They already made a Clue adaptation.
MV5BM2VlNTE1ZmMtOTAyNS00ODYwLWFmY2MtZWEzOTE2YjE1NDE2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNDk3NzU2MTQ@._V1_.jpg
 
Back
Top