The most important calls for non-exclusive agreements are increased opportunity exploitation and full market coverage. Second, what is the intent of 52.203-6 (b)? Is this a confusing way of saying that 52.203-6 (a) does not apply as long as the contract is otherwise legal, or are these some other unspecified rights of the contractor? I think I have two issues that can be related. First, why aren`t team agreements that contain the above language prohibited by 52.203-6 (a)? (Or are they?) However, they may be on to something. Perhaps the intention of this clause is only to prohibit the Primus from placing such restrictions on a party as a condition for the subcontracting of that subcommittee under the applicable contract. If this is the case, an exclusive team agreement would be acceptable for a new contract as long as it was not a precondition for the award of subcontracting work under the existing contract… The equipment agreement therefore links the sub-to-the-premium for the purposes of competition in which the subcontractor has not been able to compete independently and not offer its products independently. I don`t see any conflict with the 52.203-6. You agree, but these other contracts have nothing to do with the new PSR or the other. The terms of a contract relate only to that contract.
I assume you are not talking about an ID/IQ order, because if the subcontractor is on the ID/IQ team, there is no reason to enter into a team agreement for the new contract, since the ID/IQ subcontract terms apply the benefits of Subs` exclusive connection. this means that no one else can use their skills and experience in their proposal. However, if a sub has a real differentiation value, it is probably aware of it and the Primus must deserve its exclusivity. A strong PWin and an appropriate working group, supported in the past to honour these agreements, is the approach to managing team agreements that will best encourage them to register as an exclusive member of the team. Two inches in the air! Our legal team will not even consider a team agreement if an exclusivity clause is buried there. I`ve only seen one or two in our entire company who have been able to get legally, even `on` the request with mucho, mucho, mucho justification and terrible circumstances.