Bobert, in saying above -

"Well, Teribus still thinks that only big corporations can perform quality work."

You gravely misrepresent what I said.

As for:

"All they are gonna do is subcontract out the bulk of the work, while marking it up to the taxpayers. Smaller companies will end up doing the work and we get bilked."

katlaughing's post mentioned what the broad-brush scope of work is:

"CNN just announced that Halliburton was awarded the contract for putting out the oil fires in Iraq AND rebuilding the oil infrustructure after the war."

Now, Bobert what parts of that would they subcontract out?

1. Putting out oil fires? - No they don't need to. Dresser (now part of Halliburton) was involved in this in 1991. So by using this in-house expertise and equipment you reduce costs.

2. Rebuilding the oil infrastructure after the war. Kellog Brown & Root successfully compete for such work world-wide. They are extremely good at it.

Such a contract would be an EPCI/EPIC. The Halliburton Group is very large and contains within that corporate structure everything that is required to get the work done. One of the major factors will be the time taken to complete the work, and here Halliburton have a distinct advantage.

Now EPCI/EPIC - Halliburton Advantages:

The "E" part is engineering -
Halliburton's resources and capabilities in this area are vast - probably the biggest in the world. I take it that the smaller companies you would prefer to deal with are in business, they do have ongoing work and projected future commitments. What happens to those Bobert? Are they just cancelled, or put on hold until the work in Iraq is done. For highly specialised parts do they scramble about searching for other companies that can provide those services - if so they will end up knocking at Halliburton's door.

The "P" part is procurement -
Halliburton have customers all over the world within this sector, Halliburton companies produce items of equipment for those customers that, purely by their nature, are long lead time items. Time can be reduced by looking into rescheduling deliveries to existing customers to make items required in Iraq available rapidly. Any other contractor (you know the fifteen smaller companies you talked about in that other thread) they would have to wait.

The "I" part is Installation -
Halliburton work in the area, they have the equipment and expertise available on the door-step. This reduces mobilisation costs which is a major element of construction cost.

The "C" part is Commissioning -
For oil field work this is highly specialised, Halliburton again have the expertise and equipment required in-house.

Their biggest advantage is in their ability to manage the work - they do on a world-wide basis, on massive projects for some very large companies - and they perform well.