Jump to content

Groomer Procurement


signfan

Recommended Posts

Noticed the OFSC has the rfp up on the website.  Looks like it's been put together very well with some foresight.  Putting a multi year rfp out should help to standardize the fleet some too which is a good idea.  Noticed nothing about new drags though.  Cost saving measure I'm sure.  Good idea?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the average life of a groomer anyways? 

 

Seems to always be an issue. Did OFSC have a laps in judgement and drop the ball at some point and that's why there always seem to be an issue with groomers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, dweese said:

What's the average life of a groomer anyways? 

 

Seems to always be an issue. Did OFSC have a laps in judgement and drop the ball at some point and that's why there always seem to be an issue with groomers.

 

 

In the past the OFSC was only allotted a small provincial groomer replacement budget by the membership, individual clubs held onto the larger portion of permit dollars back then and many if most bought their own. The right choices weren't always made, hence why MOTS was created, to better pool resources with greater accountability. Hopefully better choices get made going forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am unable to substantiate what I have heard. I have been told that in some cases when clubs were buying groomers on their own they didn't perform due diligence well. Club member A would say I have a friend who can get us a good price on a new groomer, perhaps a farm tractor with tracks added. Nobody checked to see if it was a good price or not or if it was well suited to the job or not and the long term reliability. They just went ahead and purchased assuming it was a good deal.

 

The OFSC seem to be pursuing a more business like procedure with RFI, RFP, RFQ and analysis through the stages. With the $ amounts being spent the only additional thing they could do is a reverse online auction. Invite the finalist vendors to go online and enter their price as per the RFI/P/Q process. They can't see what the other's have bid but can see their ranking #1, #2, #3 etc. They now have the opportunity to sharpen their pencils and enter a new lower bid and hopefully move up in the ranking. The auction is set for typically 30 minutes and if a bid comes in during the last 5 minutes it is extended another 5 to give others a chance to respond. It ensures you are getting the best price possible. The result of the auction is non binding on the purchaser. i.e. If you find the lowest price is $1000 less than the second lowest but the lowest price is a converted farm tractor versus a conventional groomer the purchaser may opt to spend the extra $1000 for the preferred device but it may be hard to pass on a $10,000 difference in price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being that I am a Purchasing Agent, I agree that reverse auctions are good when only cost is the factor, but equipment like this would typically have all sorts of service criteria to measure too, so I suspect they would have weighted criteria that adds to 100% and scoring would dictate "best value" including all requirements weighted. (or at least I hope they did it that way)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got an email today from 1 of the club's exec. Apparently the OFSC is requested vendors propose for both converted farm tractors as well as purpose-built (OEM) machines. I take it the tractors would include both Ebert conversions & the 'Soucy-style' units.

 

I have heard concerns about the Soucy-style units not being the greatest on 'softer terrain' w/ their 4 tracks as opposed to the Eberts w/ the 2 tracks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Panther340 said:

Being that I am a Purchasing Agent, I agree that reverse auctions are good when only cost is the factor, but equipment like this would typically have all sorts of service criteria to measure too, so I suspect they would have weighted criteria that adds to 100% and scoring would dictate "best value" including all requirements weighted. (or at least I hope they did it that way)

 

That's why the reverse auction does not mean the lowest price must get the business. It ensures that you are getting the best price for the products that meet the specs you require. The price is only part of a scoring matrix that weights specific criteria as to how well it matches your requirements.

 

I used the reverse auction and a very complex weighted scoring matrix when acquiring technology solutions. I recall doing an online auction for laptops and PC's. The price variance was $10 from the lowest to the highest. Given the insignificant $ variance the technical specs were obviously a much more dominant criteria. We assessed user personal preference as well. It was one thing to get a bunch of IT people to assess a laptop or PC but we also brought in a mix of end users and asked them to rate the different brands based on a sizeable list of factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice to see new groomers on the snow. Last two years there was a budget of $5,000,000. That is about 25% of all permit sales if in one year. This year there will be no $5,000,000 budget for new groomers.

Also it's very quiet about what Chris, the new groomer fleet manager is doing. I heard from a rumor that he doesn't think that it make sense to replace the groomers every 10 years or at 5,000 hours. Well I guarantee you guys that it will be quiet until the agenda of the AGM comes out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BoG meeting on July 22. Two major items are awarding contracts under the 2 Groomer RFPs and approval of the AGM package which needs to be released in August. The third major item is the formalization of the new Groomer Replacement Program which will replace the current reduction targets and fleet size numbers. 

 

The RFPs call for a minimum of 9 units (4 tractors, 5 OEM), a target of 15 units (7 and 8), and maximum of 20 (9 and 11). Using an average cost of $250k it looks like $2.2m at the minimum and $3.7m at the target and $5m at the max. 

 

To fund this the OFSC budget is showing an allocation of $2776k to groomer replacement. To get the balance there is a new allocation from current season permit sales of $1,814k to "Permit Reserve".  This new allocation reduces the money available for the Equalization Fund. To minimize the impact on the rates paid for trails and grooming hours, the OFSC has decided that the direct 30% the clubs receive From permit sales will be reduced to 10%. But even with this the rates are still being reduced by $10.00 each. 

 

(FYI the budget assumes $18 million in permit sales). 

 

To Greggies point, there will be money to fund a significant groomer replacement (assuming permit sales materialize)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Greggie said:

It's nice to see new groomers on the snow. Last two years there was a budget of $5,000,000. That is about 25% of all permit sales if in one year. This year there will be no $5,000,000 budget for new groomers.

Also it's very quiet about what Chris, the new groomer fleet manager is doing. I heard from a rumor that he doesn't think that it make sense to replace the groomers every 10 years or at 5,000 hours. Well I guarantee you guys that it will be quiet until the agenda of the AGM comes out.


IMO the OFSC grooming fleet is not a one size fits all uniform fleet and can't be treated as such. The difference in how club A to club B maintains and cares for a machine is very contrasting, then add in terrain and climate differences from area to area.  IMO we have already sold off some decent equipment that likely would have given some clubs many more seasons good service at a much much lower cost then straight up replacement.  Speaking from experience from my past time spent on the provincial trails committee, although volunteer time taxing going over each unit by way of replacement application process was the best way to know we are replacing something that needs replacement, or granting a refurbishment grant to worthy candidates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nutter said:


IMO the OFSC grooming fleet is not a one size fits all uniform fleet and can't be treated as such. The difference in how club A to club B maintains and cares for a machine is very contrasting, then add in terrain and climate differences from area to area.  IMO we have already sold off some decent equipment that likely would have given some clubs many more seasons good service at a much much lower cost then straight up replacement.  Speaking from experience from my past time spent on the provincial trails committee, although volunteer time taxing going over each unit by way of replacement application process was the best way to know we are replacing something that needs replacement, or granting a refurbishment grant to worthy candidates. 

Some good points.  Not enough analysis is being done that actually looks at numbers.  Total life cycle cost of a groomer should be looked at and this varies depending on the terrain it operates in.  To get this to work though it can't be on a club by club basis.  The district boards need to get stronger and take on this role feeding good information back to the OFSC and taking control of the decisions around their individual fleet.  10 years and 5000 hours is and always will be a pipe dream.  15 years and 7500 hours is more realistic.  In many instances those last 5 years can be the cheapest ones to operate.  If you blow a motor or rear end at 6500 hours don't fix it.   But use that time where the amortization is essentially free.  In many cases the equipment will run through with minor repairs.

 

Also looking at it as a whole could save lots of money in purchase price.  District 1, 3 and 5 don't need a fleet of expensive Huskys.  They need a few to put the trails in in swampy areas.  Then run farm tractors that burn much less fuel and produce as good or better trail afterwards.  In many instances they are also cheaper to buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really hard to put a life expectancy on a machine. Some just wear out sooner then others, no matter what you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2017 at 7:35 AM, Nutter said:


IMO the OFSC grooming fleet is not a one size fits all uniform fleet and can't be treated as such. The difference in how club A to club B maintains and cares for a machine is very contrasting, then add in terrain and climate differences from area to area.  IMO we have already sold off some decent equipment that likely would have given some clubs many more seasons good service at a much much lower cost then straight up replacement.  Speaking from experience from my past time spent on the provincial trails committee, although volunteer time taxing going over each unit by way of replacement application process was the best way to know we are replacing something that needs replacement, or granting a refurbishment grant to worthy candidates. 

X2

 

I think we've all heard that certain types are good for flat, railbed type terrain while others are better for rocky, forested areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the weak dollar, I bet there would be some interest in the united states in our used fleet. especially new York state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/9/2017 at 2:12 PM, Viperules700 said:

With the weak dollar, I bet there would be some interest in the united states in our used fleet. especially new York state.

Always thinking there VR 700....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
6 hours ago, Greggie said:

I heard that we will get red Case groomers for the next tree years...

They work great in relatively flat areas with lots of head room. Not the best in very heavy soft snow like blown full railbeds. IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And silver Prinoth Huskies to go along with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On July 28, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Greggie said:

I heard that we will get red Case groomers for the next tree years...

Great news. At least they are red, imagine if they came in yellow instead because it was cheaper. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-07-28 at 10:44 AM, Greggie said:

I heard that we will get red Case groomers for the next tree years...

That seems like a very bad idea.

 

One size does not fit all situations.

 

This could really result in some Clubs/Associations getting very upset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what new groomers should be:D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...