Tableau litsentsid ja hooldus

Document 4 (Hankepass) details specific exclusion grounds related to criminal convictions and corruption, while Document 1 (Vastavustingimused) and AI-extracted requirements state that 'No specific mandatory exclusion grounds are detailed in the provided text.' This creates significant ambiguity for bidders regarding which grounds are truly mandatory and how they will be assessed.

The AI-extracted tender requirements state an estimated tender value of 90,000.0 EUR, while Document 6 (Lepingu projekt) specifies a maximum framework agreement value of 150,000 EUR plus VAT. This significant difference creates uncertainty about the actual expected expenditure and the scale of the contract.

Document 1 (Vastavustingimused) states the submission deadline as 2026-04-09 07:00:00, while the AI-extracted tender requirements list the deadline as 2026-04-09 10:00:00. This direct contradiction creates confusion and risk of missed deadlines.

Multiple documents (Document 1, Document 2, Document 4, Document 6) require bidders to explain business secrets. However, none of these documents provide clear guidelines on the format, content, level of detail, or evaluation criteria for this explanation. Document 1 also lists specific exclusions (bid cost, numerical indicators for evaluation criteria) which adds to the ambiguity.

Document 7 (Tehniline kirjeldus) states that if Tableau changes its licensing model or discontinues a license type, the bidder must ensure an 'equivalent service'. The term 'equivalent' is not defined, creating ambiguity regarding the scope and nature of the service expected.

Document 1 (Vastavustingimused) requires team members to possess specific Tableau certifications ('Tableau Certified Consultant' or 'Tableau Certified Data Analyst' and 'Tableau Certified Server Associate'). Failure to provide proof of these exact certifications, or equivalent, could lead to disqualification.

Document 6 (Lepingu projekt) leaves blank fields for the unit price of licenses and the hourly rate for services, indicating these are to be filled in by the bidder. However, tender requirements (Document 3, AI-extracted) mention that bid evaluation criteria focus on total cost and hourly rate, implying these should be provided upfront and clearly defined.

Document 5 (Isikuandmete töötlemise kokkulepe juriidilise isikuga) obligates the Data Processor to notify the Data Controller of any data breaches within 24 hours of detection. Failure to do so promptly can lead to severe consequences.

Document 2 (Pakkuja esitab täidetud hankemenetluses osalemise avalduse) outlines extensive anti-corruption measures that the bidder must adhere to. Failure to fully understand and implement these measures, or a misinterpretation of what constitutes a breach, could lead to severe penalties or contract termination.

Document 7 (Tehniline kirjeldus) states that prices must not exceed manufacturer price lists, but must consider the USD to EUR exchange rate and applicable state fees. Fluctuations in the exchange rate or changes in state fees could lead to unexpected cost increases for the buyer.

Document 7 (Tehniline kirjeldus) requires the bidder to ensure an equivalent service if Tableau changes its licensing model, license types, or discontinues a license type. This places a significant reliance on the bidder's ability to adapt and potentially source alternatives.

Document 1 (Vastavustingimused) requires bidders to explain business secrets but also lists specific exclusions (bid cost, numerical indicators for evaluation criteria). The interpretation of what constitutes a justifiable business secret beyond these exclusions might be subjective, leading to potential disputes.

Document 2 (Pakkuja esitab täidetud hankemenetluses osalemise avalduse) mentions GDPR and other legal acts for personal data processing, but specific requirements for a data processing agreement or access card procedures are only mentioned as being concluded *after* the contract is awarded. The exact nature of data processing and access required during the tender or pre-contractual phase is not detailed.

Document 3 (Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajad) states that in case of equal bids for both license costs and hourly rates, the contracting authority will determine the successful bidder through a lottery draw. This introduces an element of chance into the procurement outcome.

Document 3 (Hindamiskriteeriumid ja hinnatavad näitajad) uses a scoring formula for both license costs and hourly rates that relies on 'suurim väärtus' (largest value) and 'madalaim väärtus' (lowest value). Without knowing the range of bids from other participants, it is difficult for a bidder to precisely calculate their potential score or the exact impact of their pricing.

Document 2 (Pakkuja esitab täidetud hankemenetluses osalemise avalduse) states the requirement to 'explain business secrets' is vague. It is unclear what specific information is expected, how it should be presented, and what constitutes a 'business secret' in this context.

Document 7 (Tehniline kirjeldus) mentions that license renewal and support start/end dates will be agreed upon after the framework agreement is signed. While new licenses will be purchased up to the end date of previously purchased licenses, the initial harmonization process and its impact on costs and service continuity are not fully detailed.

Document 5 (Isikuandmete töötlemise kokkulepe juriidilise isikuga) states that if it conflicts with the underlying contract (lepingu nr), the terms of this agreement will apply, unless otherwise specified. This creates ambiguity and potential for disputes if not clearly managed.

Document 4 (Hankepass täiendatavate selgitustega) states that the Hankepass (ESPD) must be filled electronically in an information system or ESPD service. This implies a reliance on external IT systems for bid submission.

Document 7 (Tehniline kirjeldus) provides a list of consultation activities but states it is not exhaustive. This could lead to scope creep or disputes over what is included in the consultation services.

Document 4 details specific exclusion grounds, while AI-extracted requirements and Document 1 state that no specific grounds are detailed. This creates ambiguity for bidders.

Document 1 specifies a submission deadline of 07:00:00, while the AI-extracted requirements list 10:00:00. This direct contradiction risks disqualification due to missed deadlines.

The estimated tender value (90,000 EUR) conflicts with the maximum framework agreement value (150,000 EUR + VAT) stated in the draft contract.

Multiple documents require bidders to explain business secrets, but none provide clear guidelines on format, content, or evaluation criteria. Document 1 also lists specific exclusions, adding to the ambiguity.

Document 7 requires an 'equivalent service' if Tableau changes its licensing model, but 'equivalent' is not defined.

Document 1 requires specific Tableau certifications, but does not clarify if equivalent certifications or experience are acceptable or how they would be assessed.

Document 6 leaves unit prices for licenses and services blank, contradicting the evaluation criteria's focus on total cost and hourly rates.

Document 2 mentions GDPR compliance but only details data processing agreements post-award. Pre-contractual data handling is not specified.

Document 6 states individual orders don't need separate contracts but also that the framework agreement is concluded upon order submission, creating confusion about binding obligations.

Document 7 mentions harmonization of license/support periods after contract signing but lacks detail on the process, costs, and continuity impact.