Buyer profile is in relatively good shape. The competition for contracts is high.
Is the level of competition satisfactory? detailed info
|
Largest contracts Industry |
Bids |
|---|---|
|
Pěší zóna Tř. Míru - Sladkovského
Stavební práce |
14
Ø5 in industry |
|
Revitalizace Tyršových sadů a revitalizace podzámeckého biotopu
Stavební práce |
9
Ø5 in industry |
|
Revitalizace parku na Špici v Pardubicích
Stavební práce |
7
Ø5 in industry |
|
Pojištění nemovitého a movitého majetku a odpovědnosti za škodu statutárního města Pardubice
Pojištění |
3
Ø2 in industry |
|
ZŠ Družstevní, Polabiny - realizace úspor energií
Stavební práce |
7
Ø5 in industry |
Isn't majority of contracts awarded to small circle of firms? detailed info
| Largest suppliers | Contracts count | Contracts volume Kč |
|---|---|---|
|
Syner, s.r.o. |
3 | 104,073,257 |
|
Bak stavební společnost, a.s. |
4 | 93,473,200 |
|
Colas Cz, a.s. |
6 | 55,945,000 |
|
Gardenline s.r.o. |
5 | 37,231,338 |
|
Prima spol. s r.o. |
3 | 35,357,071 |
| Other suppliers | 64 | 288,104,619 |
| Supplier | Contracts count | Contracts volume (Kč) |
|---|---|---|
|
Syner, s.r.o. |
3 | 104,073,257 |
|
Bak stavební společnost, a.s. |
4 | 93,473,200 |
|
Colas Cz, a.s. |
6 | 55,945,000 |
|
Gardenline s.r.o. |
5 | 37,231,338 |
|
Prima spol. s r.o. |
3 | 35,357,071 |
|
Čsob Pojišťovna, a. s., člen holdingu Čsob |
1 | 23,778,966 |
|
M - Silnice a.s. |
2 | 22,368,104 |
|
Stavointerier s.r.o. |
1 | 19,667,207 |
|
Eurovia Cs, a.s. |
1 | 15,617,045 |
|
Marhold a.s. |
1 | 14,886,841 |
|
Stating s.r.o. |
1 | 13,941,452 |
|
Telmo a.s. |
1 | 13,190,088 |
|
Centropol Energy, a.s. |
2 | 12,434,164 |
|
Pražská plynárenská, a.s. |
5 | 10,918,380 |
|
Chrpa stavební společnost s r. o. Pardubice |
1 | 10,669,483 |
|
Skanska a.s. |
1 | 9,496,701 |
|
Miros Majetková a.s. |
2 | 9,128,423 |
|
Evč s.r.o. |
1 | 8,570,005 |
|
Vysspa Sports Technology s.r.o. |
1 | 7,909,599 |
|
Instal spol. s r.o. |
1 | 7,882,967 |
|
Chládek a Tintěra, Pardubice a.s. |
2 | 7,629,255 |
|
Sovis Cz, a.s. |
1 | 5,490,371 |
|
Pragoplyn, a.s. |
1 | 4,893,410 |
|
Mikostav s.r.o. |
1 | 4,743,559 |
|
Ri Okna a.s. |
1 | 4,088,601 |
|
Bauset Cz, a.s. |
1 | 3,862,955 |
|
Euromont Group a.s. |
1 | 3,698,499 |
|
Miros dopravní stavby, a.s. |
2 | 3,620,997 |
|
Window Holding a.s. |
1 | 3,470,745 |
|
Satturn Holešov spol. s r.o. |
3 | 3,298,831 |
|
Agrostav Pardubice, akciová společnost |
2 | 3,265,853 |
|
Dostihový spolek a.s. |
1 | 3,218,000 |
|
Sk-eko Systems s.r.o. |
1 | 3,195,000 |
|
Grebner - projektová a inženýrská kancelář spol. s r.o. |
1 | 2,590,000 |
|
Matex Hk s.r.o. |
1 | 2,575,372 |
|
Pražská energetika, a.s. |
1 | 2,418,154 |
|
Autocont Cz a.s. |
1 | 2,334,800 |
|
Icz a.s. |
1 | 2,126,906 |
|
4soft, s.r.o. |
1 | 1,990,135 |
|
Autus I., spol. s r.o. |
1 | 1,986,155 |
|
Vemex Energie a.s. |
1 | 1,725,876 |
|
Sph stavby s.r.o. |
1 | 1,718,847 |
|
David Hurt |
2 | 1,673,566 |
|
M - Stav Cz s.r.o. |
1 | 1,656,706 |
|
Služby města Pardubic a.s. |
1 | 1,643,724 |
|
Roman Hrdlička |
1 | 1,596,167 |
|
Hřiště hrou s.r.o. |
1 | 1,417,932 |
|
Ok Garden s.r.o. |
1 | 1,385,000 |
|
Technické služby Chrudim 2000 spol. s r.o. |
2 | 1,044,884 |
|
Zahrady Lkn s.r.o. |
1 | 735,657 |
|
Pm Consulting s.r.o. |
1 | 683,250 |
|
Plancon Praha, s.r.o. |
1 | 516,000 |
|
Ateliér A91 Hk s.r.o. |
1 | 485,000 |
|
T-mobile Czech Republic a.s. |
1 | 461,860 |
|
Konica Minolta Business Solutions Czech, spol. s r.o. |
1 | 403,127 |
Does the buyer foster the competition by using the available tools? detailed info
| Tool | Contracts count |
|---|---|
| Extended deadlines | 0% (24 from 0) |
| Nonprice competition | 5% (2 from 39) |
| Division into lots | 5% (2 from 39) |
| E-auction and DPS | 0% (0 from 39) |
| Innovative procedure | 0% ( from 39) |
What fraction of purchases was made under procurement law? detailed info
| Purchases | Volume (Kč) |
|---|---|
| Public procurement | 616,991,455 |
| Small scale tenders | 0 |
| Unregulated purchases | 1,771,066,354 |
| Total | 2,388,057,809 |
Did buyer violate law significantly? detailed info
How often does buyer use non-competitive procedures? detailed info
|
Contract Reason for negotiated procedure without publication |
Original contract (Kč) | Contract modification / NPWP (Kč) |
|---|---|---|
|
ZŠ Závodu Míru - realizace úspor energií - odstranění azbestu Krajní naléhavost |
- | 7,225,037 |
|
Revitalizace Tyršových sadů a revitalizace podzámeckého biotopu – vícepráce II. Dodatečné práce |
- | 2,587,895 |
|
Pěší zóna Třída Míru – Sladkovského – vícepráce II. Dodatečné práce |
- | 2,406,691 |
|
Revitalizace Tyršových sadů a revitalizace podzámeckého biotopu – vícepráce Dodatečné práce |
- | 2,120,911 |
|
Pěší zóna Třída Míru – Sladkovského – vícepráce Dodatečné práce |
- | 2,102,512 |
Does buyer discourage bidders by frequent competition cancellations or modifications? detailed info
| Type of flaw | Result |
|---|---|
| Issued tenders without published result | 4% |
| Cancelled contracts | 13% |
| Average requirements modifications count | 0.81 |
Does buyer publish vital data in official journal? detailed info
| Type of flaw | Contracts count |
|---|---|
| Bidders count not published | 2% (2 from 87) |
| Procedure type not published | 0% (0 from 87) |
| Missing buyer ID | 0% (0 from 87) |
| Missing call for tenders | 3% (3 from 87) |
| Missing winning price | 0% ( from 87) |
| Contract modification by more than 50 % | 0% ( from 87) |
Does the buyer profile fulfill the legal requirements? detailed info
| Is the buyers website consistent with central procurement registry? | 85% (zakázek z ve Věstníku) | ||||||||||||
| Are there obvious flaws or inconsistencies within the data? | 0.74 (average mistakes per contract) | ||||||||||||
| Are small scale tenders published on a buyer profile? (Compared to quantity of tenders under the law) |
|
Do the risky firms win frequently? detailed info
| Type of flaw | Contracts count |
|---|---|
| Supplier founded less than 180 days before contract award | 1% (1 from 87) |
| Supplier with over 75 % of turnover from public procurement | 3% (3 from 87) |
| Subcontractor share above 50 % | 0% (0 from 87) |
| Supplier demise shortly after contract | 0% (0 from 87) |
| Supplier bankruptcy | 0% (0 from 87) |
| Supplier donating to political party | 8% (7 from 87) |
| Supplier did not publish financial results on time | 11% (10 from 87) |
