[Bell Historians] Whitechapel charges

Richard Grimmett richard at Rwqb8M0ieSZlkJjXQ0qPADh6JJbQvEwSD6ZVC7vQ8FkXxY7pmz68BC2UMIu8i55frk28iuRV-hjz7xKlrA.yahoo.invalid
Tue Mar 23 21:09:40 GMT 2010

Some interesting points have been made, and of course both customer and 
potential supplier usually have the right to conduct their business in 
their own ways.

Incidentally many of the projects (not bellringing and generally very 
large multi-million ones) I have worked on have demanded the suppliers 
to pay to participate.  This is usually done to help pay for all the 
extra evaluation work required before the tender is allocated.  I 
recognise that bells are different.

On this project we have no preconceptions over suppliers.  We do value 
the incorporation of good ideas, as this makes our choice of supplier 
easier - those that add 'value' will score higher in a 
technical/proposal evaluation.   Financial proposals also have their 
place.  We are all working as trustees and are bound (very willingly) to 
honour the rules and code of the Charities Commission.  We feel our 
donors want us to deliver a quality project without wasteful 
expenditure, and that conincides with our own personal views.

We will make our own minds up about how to approach this, and whether we 
consider the fee to be necessary or not to reach our goals whilst living 
within the standards set.  I just wish we were not faced with this decision.



More information about the Bell-historians mailing list