MDB, it wouldn't be the first time I've heard that expression and it probably won't be the last! Yes things have come along way, but QS are still primarily concerned with construction cost, and Property Surveyors are concerned with value.
You rightly say contractors will still try to make more on the construction element (on which they take 100% of the profits) that their 15% investment. But for a job of this size and with the need to attract lending and investment, I'm sure the contract will be suffiently watertight. Lenders to such projects even have internationally standardised amendments to the standard FIDIC terms and conditions. They often insist on such terms to protect themselves and consequently the project. These are known as the MDB Harmonised Construction Contract. Same name as yourself in fact! I would expect nothing less in this contract.
CCC in a 'Management Contracting' role sounds like it could be a runner. Normally 'management contractors' take a percentage which would be fine as a project of this size needs a construction/programme manager. I assumed that was Baker Hughes job. Also that statement leaves me wondering about the statement in the 10Q that the prices would be agreed as a lump sum from the outset.
You see, with all of this talk of a 'Bill of Materials' I was thinking CCC might be taking on the works directly based on pre-agreed rates. This is specifically mentioned in the 10Q as the case for the Enabling Works Packages. For the construction works, when the design is sufficiently advanced, I was thinking they might measure and value the work based on the Bill of Materials rates, and then take this value, and conclude a fixed price lump sum for the element.
All will be revealed soon I hope!
