It would be if it was a staff augmentation contract. For example, if we had asked for a level three technical architect and we were delivered a level two technical architect, that would be fraudulent, but in this case, in the Botler case, we were asking for an outcome, for an output, and, therefore, we were judging the quality of the output on the quality of the work done, not on who did it.
On March 26th, 2024. See this statement in context.