Laserfiche WebLink
77 <br />tions must deal with primes who he may be working with on <br />other projects. Obviously, the CM needs to foster good <br />relationships with the primes for the project at hand, but <br />this same firm must also consider relationships that may <br />occur in future projects. While a CM must always be <br />reasonable, compromising situations could exist where inter- <br />ests other than the owner's come into play.129 <br />10. CM can increase the cost of bonding for a project <br />because multiplicity of small bonds for a prime contractor <br />is a greater expense than one large bond for a general <br />contractor.130 Others dispute this fact by stating the <br />difference in total bonding costs may be less because con- <br />tractors with small contracts may avoid the costs of bonding <br />by using other acceptable security. Another counterpoint to <br />this argument is the exposure issue that was discussed inthe <br />advantages section.131 <br />11. Bonding of prime contractors may limit the number <br />of subcontractors (primes) that are able to compete for the <br />work. When a general contractor provides a bond for the <br />entire project, he may carry certain subs that are not able <br />to bond on their own. The general contractor providing the <br />129 <br />Foxhall, op. cit., 15. <br />130 Weinert, "A Study of Agency Construction <br />Management," op. cit., 39. <br />131 Beckwith, op. cit., (Interview). <br />26 <br />