If it weren't for the SEC this still would be private business between Boris and EDS.

Maybe UK plc needs an SEC too (not a toothless brainless pointless selfcongratulatory regulator, we already got Ofcon for that).

a mere sideshow; the apalling tech angle is that regardless of who gets the contract to invade Londoners' privacy (aka run the transport payment system), the user card will still be based on the known-bad MiFare 'Classic'

PH is known bad but more entertaining

I've got a card cloner on order and I'll be using it until they change to using a private and secure system...

PH because even she could run a better scheme.

The sad part of this is that only two bidders are being spoken to at all, neither of which is british.

So the London Transport System (and I use that in the loosest possible terms) in the lead up to the Olympics in London, when capacity is going to be stretched, will have a flawed Dutch RFiD card, operated by at least one American company (if not two). The choice for who TfL are allowed to signed with is dicated not in London, but in the US, so presumably the contract is written under US law.

I wonder which brain-of-Britain decided that this was a good idea? Who chose not to involve UK based companies (eg Logica) for this?

Oh, yes. That would be good old Ken. Nice one Ken. Loosing that election is looking like a great decision now, isn't it.

I'm not sure who the baddy is in this case since TfL and EDS both have their flaws and I'm not familiar with Cubic. All I do know is that I wouldn't trust EDS further than I could comfortably spit a rat, and while Boris isn't Red Ken, a change of figurehead doesn't change a regime overnight.

Perhaps PH will do a "PH for Mayor" video next? Maybe?

EDS will fight for this tooth and nail because it is the only "smart card" project that they can boast of. This is a key factor for their other government tenders and is always trotted out as an example of their BPO and working in partnership capability to deliver a service.

It's not so much about money as pre renegotiation a couple of years ago EDS were loosing money because their revenue is pegged on the use of oyster cards. In so much as EDS only start to get paid after a card has been used around 200 times. When TFL changed the travel deals from paper tickets to being better to buy an oyster card it hit EDS hard with all the new cards needing to be issued (to day trippers and casual users) over and above the comitted london travellers.

With any luck it will help knock their position on national ID cards and others.

Has it not ocurred to EDS's lawyers that future Invitations To Tender from public institutions in London (and perhaps, the UK) could be written in such a way that EDS could never win. It would be easy to specify a few essential criteria that you know a particular company doesn't have/cannot meet.

"Oh, yes. That would be good old Ken"

'Fraid not me old mukka; the contract was signed in 1998 and 'good old Ken' wasn't elected until 2000. One suspects, given his actual record on such things, he'd have negotiated a better deal. PFI is always rubbish value for money; that's one reason he arranged to buy out Croydon Tramlink, for example.

But then I'm guessing you're part of the "bash Ken regardless of any actual facts" brigade so I'm probably wasting my time telling you all this...

I worked on the early stages of the project years ago, and I can only remember Fujitsu Services (ICL) and Cubic actually doing any work on the project. I can't honestly remember exactly what involvement EDS had in anything which was happening. Which is probably because they did nothing.

It's 'losing' money, or 'losing' an election. Not 'loosing'.

Drives me up the wall.

Paris - because it will help you to remember what loose refers to.

I think you need to losen up.

(and that one was deliberately mizpeled :-).

Thy evil overlort (dang, done it again).

Mwohahaha..

PH, 'coz she doesn't need to spell.

see http://www.eds.com/news/releases/3075/

...are mutually exclusive and should never be put within the same context except as a bad example !!

Of course an injunction is really good for business.

If a customer doesn't perceive value for money, wants to opt out and engage another vendor, EDS will sue!

Great guys. Ever hear of losing gracefully?

Going forward most firms will think twice - even three times - about signing a contract with EDS if they know a lawsuit may be in their future.