Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this site.

Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

No, it suggests that a tender was rigged.
Click to expand...

More than one apparently...
Having called a few of my ex colleagues since this post first appeared, it appears this practice is still alive and well in this country.
Click to expand...

I'd also like to point out that I haven't been to the pub in quite a while, and it certainly wasn't where I heard my anecdote. An anecdote that tallies with Diddle's first hand experience, which you believe.

So I conclude, that potential candidates should be aware that the tendering system is indeed rigged. However, it might not be rigged in all cases.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

umop3p!sdn said:
So I conclude, that potential candidates should be aware that the tendering system is indeed rigged. However, it might not be rigged in all cases.
Click to expand...
I see your logic. It rained yesterday, therefore it rains everyday. Except on those days where it doesn't rain.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

Complainer said:
You played your part in creating an environment of corruption in your industry, so don't be surprised when it comes back to bite you on the ass.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe in Karma????
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

Complainer said:
I see your logic. It rained yesterday, therefore it rains everyday. Except on those days where it doesn't rain.
Click to expand...

How about its rained on and off for years, we live in a wet country and so it might well rain tomorrow?
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

Does anyone know the name of the seminars for tendering for these contracts, think they're on in the RDS?
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

Complainer said:
Keep it simple. The tender recipients may not have latest versions of the MS products. I would stick with Word or pdf, but if in doubt (and the tender document does not specify what format is required), ask the question beforehand.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest you use pdf.

I've seen proposals in Word go out from one large consulting firm with full change tracking history still on the document.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

I have used this website quite a lot. I have won a coupld of things off it. I'd say 1 in 10.

It's very hit or miss though. It's much better when you have some form of intro into the organisation beforehand.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

I see PWC and E&Y have been awarded the NAMA contract for "Appointment to a panel for Loan and Associated Valuation Services to NAMA"...

PWC have also been awarded the contract for Tax Advisory Services.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

censuspro said:
I see PWC and E&Y have been awarded the NAMA contract for "Appointment to a panel for Loan and Associated Valuation Services to NAMA"...

PWC have also been awarded the contract for Tax Advisory Services.
Click to expand...

PWC to Govt: "Hey looks like you'll need some crazy vehicle to hide all of this mess from the public. If there was any tender for any such madness, I'm sure we could be competitive...."

Govt to PWC: "Funny you should mention that, we are looking into restructuring the countries foreign debt, you might be on to something, we will indeed be issuing a tender. Vehcile, good idea"

PWC: "Hey look, they tender is nearly exactly the same as we would have advised, lets post..."

Future: Tender awarded to PWC for NAMA consulting bid

Now obviously it never happened like that, I have no idea how that tender was run, but it's just used as an example as to how the process can remain intact and proper, while still being abused and closed.

If it was to be transparent as possible a full list of tenderers and their price quoted should be available to all other tenderers, even before they submit in order to avoid waste of time money and costs as we know "..all costs, time etc for this tender shall be covered by the tenderer..."

Huge waste of time, money and effort for the majority of reputable businesses trying to win a tender.

I stay clear of them
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

sinbadsailor said:
If it was to be transparent as possible a full list of tenderers and their price quoted should be available to all other tenderers, even before they submit in order to avoid waste of time money and costs as we know "..all costs, time etc for this tender shall be covered by the tenderer..."
Click to expand...
So that the tenderers can come in with a high-ball price? This would completely defeat the purpose of competitive tendering!
sinbadsailor said:
Huge waste of time, money and effort for the majority of reputable businesses trying to win a tender.

I stay clear of them
Click to expand...
Many, many reputable businesses are quite willing to tender within the current system - imperfect as it may be.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

I have evaluated tender replies for about 10 years now where the value of the contract would be in around €100k (ICT) or less each time. The various comments over the past 3 pages about predetermined winners is b*s* in 100% of the tenders that I have seen.
The winner of a tender is scored based on the tender reply received. I can’t rely on information regarding a company (no matter how formal) if that information is not placed in the tender reply. I’ve seen plenty of smaller companies fail to feature in the final 3 because they just didn’t take the time to present a decent reply or displayed a total lack of understanding of the requirements.
Tips
  • If you are asked for CVs – attach them.
  • Reproduce the tender document in Word and comment on each requirement, but do not write AGREED or NOTED where you could in fact write some interesting fact about yourself/your company.
  • warning to docx users - convert your documents into PDF before submitting. Check that your pdfs open on another machine before sending.
  • Usually there is no problem ringing the publisher for a quick chat before submitting the reply to introduce yourself.
  • Answer every single question in the response instructions. If you omit to answer a question you will drop scores.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

In some cases there will already be a preferred supplier but for legal reasons they have to get quotes off at leat three different companies before making a decision. I know this as in one job I had a company actually admit it to me when they rang looking for a quote! Doesn't mean you haven't a shot - if what you put in is very good it may still get their attention.

Other tender will not already have a preferred supplier and therefore it will all go on whats submitted.

Re that particular site I have worked with companies who used it and they won some and lost some. Often a company would ring in and say that they had requirements and would send you on the tender details or tell you what site it was going to be listed on in advance.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

In the end it is a flawed system whereby works are given to preferred parties all the time under the guise of a fair and equitable system. I've even heard of the preferred party having a major role in outlining the text of the Tender!

The words 'competitive' and 'competition' are thrown around way to much. The more you hear it , the less there actually is once you get past the 'process'.

The tendering process is just not equal. Website projects are looking for accounts for companies turning 500k in a year. There are many software development houses who would run rings around the big consultancies for half the price but are automatically excluded by an unfair requirements, designed to do this on purpose.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

sinbadsailor said:
In the end it is a flawed system whereby works are given to preferred parties all the time under the guise of a fair and equitable system. I've even heard of the preferred party having a major role in outlining the text of the Tender!
Click to expand...
No system is perfect, but works aren't given to anyone 'all the time'. This just isn't happening on a widespread basis. If you believe that it is happening, then you need to address this by raising the issue with the CEO or Shane Ross or Joe Duffy or whoever it takes to get it sorted.

sinbadsailor said:
The words 'competitive' and 'competition' are thrown around way to much. The more you hear it , the less there actually is once you get past the 'process'.
Click to expand...
This is just meaningless.

sinbadsailor said:
The tendering process is just not equal. Website projects are looking for accounts for companies turning 500k in a year. There are many software development houses who would run rings around the big consultancies for half the price but are automatically excluded by an unfair requirements, designed to do this on purpose.
Click to expand...
The size requirement is controversial, and I don't always agree with it, but it has some basis. The small guys are less likely to be still around at the end of the project than the big guys.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

davidoco said:
I have evaluated tender replies for about 10 years now where the value of the contract would be in around €100k (ICT) or less each time. The various comments over the past 3 pages about predetermined winners is b*s* in 100% of the tenders that I have seen.
The winner of a tender is scored based on the tender reply received. I can’t rely on information regarding a company (no matter how formal) if that information is not placed in the tender reply. I’ve seen plenty of smaller companies fail to feature in the final 3 because they just didn’t take the time to present a decent reply or displayed a total lack of understanding of the requirements.
Tips
  • If you are asked for CVs – attach them.
  • Reproduce the tender document in Word and comment on each requirement, but do not write AGREED or NOTED where you could in fact write some interesting fact about yourself/your company.
  • warning to docx users - convert your documents into PDF before submitting. Check that your pdfs open on another machine before sending.
  • Usually there is no problem ringing the publisher for a quick chat before submitting the reply to introduce yourself.
  • Answer every single question in the response instructions. If you omit to answer a question you will drop scores.
Click to expand...

How do you explain The Shannon Foynes Port Company (SFPC). Have a look at my previous post further up the page. Also, wasn't Artur Cox awarded the contract to advise the government on the bank guarantees without the tender going out to contract?

Also, the fact that E&Y are part of the valuations panel is just beggars belief when you consider their involvement in the Anglo affair.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

The size requirement is controversial, and I don't always agree with it, but it has some basis. The small guys are less likely to be still around at the end of the project than the big guys.
Click to expand...
This is exactly the attitude that is a root cause of the problem. There is absolutely no basis to it either. Big companies go bust, and so do small companies. Indeed, it might be better to go with a small company, because they might devote more to it than their larger competitors.

The small guys will never get to be the big guys when people think like this.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

The size requirement is controversial, and I don't always agree with it, but it has some basis. The small guys are less likely to be still around at the end of the project than the big guys.
Click to expand...

Thats because they have used better tools, done a better and faster job and have already left the building, leaving the customer with smile and a fatter pocket. What you have to remember is that a successful project should not need a 2 year maintanence contract bolted on to the end of it.

That is not a fair way to judge whether or not you give a smaller company a break within the tender process. They have after all signed contracts to provide the solution and in the end, need the job as they are only a small business. Greater customer focus and incentive to impress are therefore present. Win win in my opinion, but alas, it doesn't work out that way.
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

umop3p!sdn said:
The small guys will never get to be the big guys when people think like this.
Click to expand...

Probably the whole point of it. Protect and control their profits and actually stifling competition rather than promoting it
 
Re: Govt E-Tenders Website: Has anyone had any success with the contracts on this sit

I can see that 'size' is a sore point, and I don't claim to be expert in the procurement rationale behind this. But if anyone is really concerned to know what is going on (as opposed to just wanting a good moan), they should contact [broken link removed] and have a good chat to understand the rationale.

There are indeed some procurement exercises where ongoing support is absolutely essential, such as an ERP system or a key business application. Sometimes I wonder why it is easier for people to accept conspiracy theories (e.g. they are all out to get us, the job was sewn up beforehand etc) rather than just accepting that the other guy had a better proposal/price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top