Regarding the instrument framework and public bidding issues
Thread Content
Currently, Sinopec uses framework agreements and open tendering methods for material procurement, but there are increasingly more problems related to declining quality and a rising failure rate:@
These days, most tenders result in bids at low prices; designated suppliers are not allowed, making it difficult to ensure quality.
This requires that the contents of the technical agreement be carefully reviewed when signing the contract
What’s bought is not as good as what’s sold. No matter how careful you are, the seller can always find a way to take advantage of the situation
Two issues: First, there is a disconnect between design and procurement; procurement requires design approval, and relying solely on the instrument specifications from the design is not reliable； Second, there is a disconnect between usage and procurement; product quality is determined through actual use, and no database has been established in this regard, which leads to many problems in procurement.
Now it’s said to be well-managed, but it has side effects: a second-rate dealer is hired, providing third-rate products. It’s oneself who suffers. It’s not as good as before; although it’s XX, the product quality is still more reliable.
The framework itself does not affect product quality. For manufacturers, the framework simply means that if you can produce a certain amount per year, I will offer you a discount; manufacturers prefer this approach as it results in a win-win situation. I’m not very familiar with open bidding, but I think that currently some users insist on getting the lowest price when bidding. Some brands are able to meet this requirement, while others can’t. Moreover, users want a low price yet also a well-known brand – so it’s easy to imagine what the quality of the products will be like. I’ve personally encountered fake or refurbished products……
In fact, the framework should also set boundaries, with bidding conducted among manufacturers approved by the selected users; the users must choose manufacturers whose quality is roughly at the same level in order to make comparisons. For example, there is a tier for imported products, a tier for joint-venture products, and a tier for high-quality domestic products.
Haha, Sinopec’s framework is going to kill people, especially a certain e-commerce platform; I’ve already heard about it.
I’m not sure. I’m not involved in business activities, but it should be fine. Personally, I think this framework is a win-win situation: the seller sets a deadline for the buyer to make a purchase, and offers a reasonable price
Let’s put it this way: some manufacturers come up with unfair rules. Since it’s a framework, these rules aren’t necessarily enforced; for those they don’t want to implement, they report a price of 10 yuan to lower the average price. Then, when it’s time to actually enforce those rules, they avoid doing so, fail to meet the delivery deadlines, and so on. As a result, many other manufacturers end up being cheated – it’s impossible to determine accurate prices, and they lose money on every order they place.