Yanking the chain

A little bummed tonight. Just found out I lost another RFP bid – the fourth loss in the last month or so. What bothers me the most about these government RFPs is the language they use. In the last three cases, my ‘bid’ (which usually takes a day or two to prepare – they are serious efforts) was disqualified because I didn’t “meet the minimum qualifications” for the work. Anyone who has responded to a government RFP probably knows what I am talking about.

Why can’t they just say I was beat out by another bid? That whole didn’t meet the minimum requirements bit is too frustrating. Particularly when the work is a straight forward ED project – stuff I have been doing for 17 years. I guess I can call to get a better explanation but what’s the point?

Oh well. Enough beaking off for now.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Yanking the chain

  1. Harold Jarche says:

    I can relate; lost several this past month. Not always a failed bid, but sometimes just pushed back ’til sometime in the future. I’ll raise a glass of wine o we independents (independent thinkers and independently trying to make a living).

  2. Anonymous says:

    I still will claim,nothing has changed,somehow the bid will go where they want it.

  3. Trevor says:

    Most RFP’s I have run across, they have another vendor in mind. The decision makers just need other bidders to fill out columns B and C to justify the decision.

    It’s a dounble edge sword… You have to be at the table, but you question is risk = reward..

  4. richard says:

    “Most RFP’s I have run across, they have another vendor in mind. “

    I agree. Corporate managers almost always look for a proposal that matches up with what they want to do. And what they “want to do” largely depends upon who has been lobbying them. Doughnuts for dollars the winning proposal is written by someone who has been in close contact with the manager and has helped tailor the RFP to suit that someone.