What is the right to the most advantageous offer?

Let's see, the "most advantageous offer" roll in public procurement is not just a beautiful phrase to fill paper. It is basically the trick so that the institutions do not throw the money from the taxpayers and get the best possible for what they pay. And no, it does not mean to go for the cheapest, like when you buy cheap toilet paper and end up regretting you. Here the key is the value for money, but really.

When an administration seeks to hire something - from the construction of a bridge to catering for a municipal party - it does not choose only for the "lowest price." You have to look at everything: quality, experience, reputation, deadlines, maintenance costs, if the proposal is sustainable ... even if the supplier has the creativity of presenting something innovative. That is, a combo. It is not as simple as it seems.

Companies that want to get into these public competitions have to curb it. It is not enough to send a budget and now. It is time to prepare solid, well -argued proposals, demonstrate that they have already eaten similar marrons before, that they can deliver in time, and yes, that the price makes sense. The competition here is real, not a walk in the park.

And yes, this of the "most advantageous offer" was not invented by anyone's brother -in -law. It is written in the law at European level and in that of many countries. For example, the 2014/24/EU Directive basically says: "Hey, don't be shabby, choose what goes better for everyone, not only the cheapest." So as is (well, the same not so literal, but it is understood).

Moral: If you want to catch a public contract, forget cheap shortcuts. The authorities are going to look at everything, not just the price. You have to present a balanced proposal, which not only promises to save money, but also demonstrate quality and capacity. If not, or bother.