Cheap Today. Costly Tomorrow. How One Bollard Spec Killed Profit.

(And Why Lowballing Your Way In Can Blow Up in Your Face)

A client once thought they were being clever.
They priced a cheaper bollard, not what was called for, banking on changing the spec after award.

They submitted.
They won.
They celebrated.

But then…

The consultant rejected their bollard post-award.

It didn’t meet spec.
Now they had two choices:

  • Omit their bollard cost entirely (margin gone)

  • Or pay the difference and absorb the loss (margin worse)

They went in with a price-win strategy…
And came out with zero profit, zero credibility, and a team scrambling to justify a product swap.

⚠️ This Happens More Than You Think

Tenderers think:

“Let’s quote something cheaper now, we’ll change it later.”

But under PQM scoring and consultant reviews, this backfires. Hard.
Because:

  • Specs aren’t just words — they’re evaluation anchors

  • Post-award deviations raise red flags

  • Consultants have seen these tricks before, and they push back

You don’t just lose margin.
You lose trust, with consultants, with clients, with future invites.

✅ How We Prevent That

We help clients quote strategically, not just “cheaply.”


That means:

  • Submitting fully aligned specs from day one

  • Offering compliant alternatives before award, not after

  • Structuring the submission to maximise Q-score and protect margin

📌 Don’t Get Burned Post-Award

If you’re preparing a bollard or HVM submission now:


📞 Book a 15-min pre-submission review with our tech team.


We’ll catch what might fail before the consultant does.



Next
Next

Staying Ahead of the Curve: Emerging Trends in Hostile Vehicle Tactics