Tenders from the inside by the participant
In response to the post dikud about tenders, I wanted to highlight the question on my part. I myself work in a small IT office, the main activity is work with complex implementations of 1C and the supply of iron. Not long ago, the search for tenders suitable for my organization was added to my duties. Perhaps this post will help those who are going to participate in electronic trading.
First of all it is necessary to receive the EDS. The only difficulty that can be encountered at this step is the ardent imposition by the regional representatives of the Token Verification Centers to the bargain. I am not against the use of the token itself, when it is justified, but the salesman’s imposition of a paid extra service is extremely annoying. Why is this happening to me as a whole is clear: the overwhelming majority do not know how to work with EDS and poorly imagine that this EDS is of itself, which nevertheless does not justify the salesman’s behavior.
Next, you need to go through the accreditation on the trading floor. If we are talking about bidding for 94 FZs, then the total number of sites 5 and the registration form they differ only in design and other wording in the registration form. The main difficulty lies in the fact that to go through a long quest and collect all the documents on the list. Then, within 5 working days, the documents are checked and the answer comes, either with the accreditation, or with a list of corrections. And so on each site. Search open for filing auctions at the office. It makes sense to carry out the site only after registering at least 3 of 5 sites.
')
When you get to work on the site itself comes the first disappointment, which lies in the number of auctions themselves: it leaves much to be desired. Further, a real hell with industries and fields of activity becomes noticeable. I will not name a specific site in my example, although there are only 5 of them, anyone who has come across directly working on them will determine on the first attempt. And so, when you search with a restriction on your area and to grow "Computer equipment, consumables and software" results of zero. If you choose "Office equipment and office equipment", then the results of more than a hundred, and most of them fall according to the logic of things in computer equipment. In other matters, you can still accept it. When working on the procurement site, you can once again marvel at the strange work of the state. resources. For example, this time the search on the site for searching government orders simply does not work! If you enter any request, you are redirected to the page "This page is temporarily unavailable, please try again later." Of course there is no news on the main about any works. Upd: to date, repaired.
In the process of studying the auctions themselves, you get acquainted with such a terrible thing as the “economic rationale”, on the basis of which the maximum price of the auction is built. A justification is made on the basis of an analysis of commercial proposals and is selected, either the average price (extremely rare) or the minimum (in about 90% of cases). The main misfortune of such a justification is that the originator of the commercial offer does not bear any responsibility for the authenticity of his commercial offer, but the participants who submitted applications are already responsible and in case of victory they will be obliged to work precisely at these prices. It turns out, if we are talking about PC supply, then only large players in the market can express themselves and in practice there is no question of opening auctions for small businesses. As for the service sector, in this case, if the auction concerns the topic of the main profile of activity, it makes sense to participate. The main thing is to relate that this is still an auction and in the process of the trading session itself not to get excited. In the end, in the end, if you win, you will have to work with the customer at this price. The only hope for a relatively small company is the poorly written application and the selection of components in the lowest range of requirements and the search for the cheapest possible "equivalents". As a result, the customer receives the equipment from third-rate vendors instead of initially collecting a competent and specific application.
Another thing that can scare off a potential participant is the provision of an auction. In small auctions this is not so critical, because according to the law FZ-94, it is within 0.5-5% of the auction amount. However, in the event of a victory, you will have to face the guarantee of contract fulfillment, and it can already reach 30%. In the case of fair execution, both amounts are returned to the participant. The first sum guarantees that the auction participant is sufficiently solvent to participate in the auction, and the second one guarantees the fulfillment of the contract and, if not, goes to the customer. By the way, in this moment we still find out what the profit of the trading floor itself is and due to what it works: in case of winning the auction up to 2,000 rubles. leaves the trading floor. In case the amount of security is less than 2000, the whole amount is transferred to the site.
Regarding the “collusion” that dikud mentioned, then everything is simple: in my practice I didn’t see any potential winner with the customer explicitly communicating, but in a fairly narrow area all market participants simply know each other and there’s no need for direct communication. Just seeing the price tag on a particular auction can already predict the winner, since there is only one supplier in the region who works at such rates. But as far as the supplier’s communication with the customer is concerned in order to prepare documentation for the auction itself, here, it seems to me, the argument is far-fetched. Because there are specialized authorized bodies in each region (region), to whom the application is given and they already independently prepare and place all the necessary documentation on the public procurement website.
What else is worth mentioning is the upcoming FZ-44, which will replace the FZ-94. In general, the changes are cosmetic in nature, but the Unified Information System, through which it is planned to work in the future, simply does not exist yet and the requirements for it are simply not drawn up. So what to expect further from the beloved government is still unknown. Most likely, either the postponement, or something terrible and inoperable.
In conclusion, I do not consider tenders to be utter marasmus, but many flaws do exist:
1. At times, the public procurement site does not work.
2. Auctions placed in unpredictable industries
3. Economic justification for which you want to force the authors of the original commercial proposals just to take and work on these price tags.
4. Finally, the situation with the upcoming FZ-44 is not clear.
In which cases it is reasonable to participate:
1. Clear competitive advantage
2. If the auction in the sphere of the main activity of the organization and in the case of work with reduced profitability there is a chance to hook the client to his other services and services already outside the auction.
3. Access to special suppliers.
First of all it is necessary to receive the EDS. The only difficulty that can be encountered at this step is the ardent imposition by the regional representatives of the Token Verification Centers to the bargain. I am not against the use of the token itself, when it is justified, but the salesman’s imposition of a paid extra service is extremely annoying. Why is this happening to me as a whole is clear: the overwhelming majority do not know how to work with EDS and poorly imagine that this EDS is of itself, which nevertheless does not justify the salesman’s behavior.
Next, you need to go through the accreditation on the trading floor. If we are talking about bidding for 94 FZs, then the total number of sites 5 and the registration form they differ only in design and other wording in the registration form. The main difficulty lies in the fact that to go through a long quest and collect all the documents on the list. Then, within 5 working days, the documents are checked and the answer comes, either with the accreditation, or with a list of corrections. And so on each site. Search open for filing auctions at the office. It makes sense to carry out the site only after registering at least 3 of 5 sites.
')
When you get to work on the site itself comes the first disappointment, which lies in the number of auctions themselves: it leaves much to be desired. Further, a real hell with industries and fields of activity becomes noticeable. I will not name a specific site in my example, although there are only 5 of them, anyone who has come across directly working on them will determine on the first attempt. And so, when you search with a restriction on your area and to grow "Computer equipment, consumables and software" results of zero. If you choose "Office equipment and office equipment", then the results of more than a hundred, and most of them fall according to the logic of things in computer equipment. In other matters, you can still accept it. When working on the procurement site, you can once again marvel at the strange work of the state. resources. For example, this time the search on the site for searching government orders simply does not work! If you enter any request, you are redirected to the page "This page is temporarily unavailable, please try again later." Of course there is no news on the main about any works. Upd: to date, repaired.
In the process of studying the auctions themselves, you get acquainted with such a terrible thing as the “economic rationale”, on the basis of which the maximum price of the auction is built. A justification is made on the basis of an analysis of commercial proposals and is selected, either the average price (extremely rare) or the minimum (in about 90% of cases). The main misfortune of such a justification is that the originator of the commercial offer does not bear any responsibility for the authenticity of his commercial offer, but the participants who submitted applications are already responsible and in case of victory they will be obliged to work precisely at these prices. It turns out, if we are talking about PC supply, then only large players in the market can express themselves and in practice there is no question of opening auctions for small businesses. As for the service sector, in this case, if the auction concerns the topic of the main profile of activity, it makes sense to participate. The main thing is to relate that this is still an auction and in the process of the trading session itself not to get excited. In the end, in the end, if you win, you will have to work with the customer at this price. The only hope for a relatively small company is the poorly written application and the selection of components in the lowest range of requirements and the search for the cheapest possible "equivalents". As a result, the customer receives the equipment from third-rate vendors instead of initially collecting a competent and specific application.
Another thing that can scare off a potential participant is the provision of an auction. In small auctions this is not so critical, because according to the law FZ-94, it is within 0.5-5% of the auction amount. However, in the event of a victory, you will have to face the guarantee of contract fulfillment, and it can already reach 30%. In the case of fair execution, both amounts are returned to the participant. The first sum guarantees that the auction participant is sufficiently solvent to participate in the auction, and the second one guarantees the fulfillment of the contract and, if not, goes to the customer. By the way, in this moment we still find out what the profit of the trading floor itself is and due to what it works: in case of winning the auction up to 2,000 rubles. leaves the trading floor. In case the amount of security is less than 2000, the whole amount is transferred to the site.
Regarding the “collusion” that dikud mentioned, then everything is simple: in my practice I didn’t see any potential winner with the customer explicitly communicating, but in a fairly narrow area all market participants simply know each other and there’s no need for direct communication. Just seeing the price tag on a particular auction can already predict the winner, since there is only one supplier in the region who works at such rates. But as far as the supplier’s communication with the customer is concerned in order to prepare documentation for the auction itself, here, it seems to me, the argument is far-fetched. Because there are specialized authorized bodies in each region (region), to whom the application is given and they already independently prepare and place all the necessary documentation on the public procurement website.
What else is worth mentioning is the upcoming FZ-44, which will replace the FZ-94. In general, the changes are cosmetic in nature, but the Unified Information System, through which it is planned to work in the future, simply does not exist yet and the requirements for it are simply not drawn up. So what to expect further from the beloved government is still unknown. Most likely, either the postponement, or something terrible and inoperable.
In conclusion, I do not consider tenders to be utter marasmus, but many flaws do exist:
1. At times, the public procurement site does not work.
2. Auctions placed in unpredictable industries
3. Economic justification for which you want to force the authors of the original commercial proposals just to take and work on these price tags.
4. Finally, the situation with the upcoming FZ-44 is not clear.
In which cases it is reasonable to participate:
1. Clear competitive advantage
2. If the auction in the sphere of the main activity of the organization and in the case of work with reduced profitability there is a chance to hook the client to his other services and services already outside the auction.
3. Access to special suppliers.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/191174/
All Articles