Most of those emails are wrong.
Maven may be wrong at any price or size. But Google's characterization of it as a minor project doesn't seem contradicted by these emails.
Most of those emails are wrong.
Maven may be wrong at any price or size. But Google's characterization of it as a minor project doesn't seem contradicted by these emails.
For a new company, the risk is relatively high, because there's a lot of up front work that has to be done (auditing, compliance, security, etc). But once that is ironed out, larger contracts become easier and easier.
And then the only real risk is on a "firm fixed price" style of contract where the contractor assumes all the risk of product delivery. But many other are "time and materials" where the risk is shifted onto the government. If you fail to deliver a product, you're not on the hook because the government was paying for "time and materials" not the end product itself.
So yes, google may actually lose money on a $9MM contract, but probably not on the next $100MM contract.
In order to do any work for the government, you have to show that you have have done the work before to a satisfactory standard, and that you've done it for a type of agency similar to the one requesting proposals for the work.
So, while a given project might be nearly worthless, you do it so that you can say that you did it, so that you're eligible to do it again in the future. The side, but still major benefit of this is that it excludes would-be competitors from getting that qualification, adding barriers to them for getting similar work like this in the future.
Smaller companies, even companies that do exactly, or even only a given thing, often find it hard to get work doing their chosen thing because they don't have these past performances. To get their first qualified performance, they typically have to partner up with a larger company that has qualifications for work at the agency (think Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc.), and do small bits of work as a sub-contractor for them until you have enough documented performance to do the work on your own.
Whether or not these particular military contracts are worth much, it opens the door for a larger variety of contracts, which can be worth tens of billions per year.
My larger point is that you wouldn't have to start working with them on drones unless you wanted to get in good with their drone funding teams, who appear, by and large, to be dedicated to killing people remotely. [my opinion there]