Festive Activation at Pier Head and St George's Plateau

This document appears to be a pre-procurement or market engagement notice rather than a formal tender, exhibiting significant ambiguities and deficiencies in process definition and critical information. The overall quality is poor, particularly concerning the timeline and absence of evaluation criteria.

The tender lacks fundamental legal clarity, with 'Type' and 'Procedure' undefined and 'Status: planning' suggesting it's not a formal tender yet. Mandatory exclusion grounds are not provided. The timeline, where a 'submission deadline' precedes a market engagement event for an 'upcoming tender,' creates significant legal ambiguity regarding the nature of the submission required by Feb 5th.

While the overall objective is clear, the document suffers from severe clarity issues regarding the procurement process. Evaluation criteria are entirely missing. The most significant concern is the 'submission deadline' on Feb 5th, which occurs *before* a market engagement event on Feb 9th, explicitly stated to be for understanding requirements for the *upcoming tender*. This makes it unclear what exactly is expected to be submitted by the earlier deadline.

Basic information like title, organization, value, and duration is present. However, critical elements such as the procedure type, evaluation criteria, and mandatory exclusion grounds are missing. One of the four listed documents also failed to download, indicating incomplete access to information. The 'Liable Person' field is also empty.

The absence of evaluation criteria makes the process entirely non-transparent and inherently unfair. The lack of e-submission creates barriers to equal access. Furthermore, the failed document download hinders full information access. The confusing timeline, where a submission is due before a key information-sharing event, creates an uneven playing field for potential bidders.

While basic practical details like contract start and duration are provided, the lack of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement, potentially increasing administrative burden for both bidders and the contracting authority. The failed document download also presents a practical hurdle.

Several key fields ('Type', 'Procedure', 'Liable Person') are unpopulated. The most critical inconsistency is the timeline: a 'submission deadline' on Feb 5th for what appears to be a pre-tender stage, followed by a market engagement event on Feb 9th specifically for understanding requirements for the *upcoming tender*. This creates a logical contradiction and makes the entire process inconsistent.

The tender makes no mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. There is no indication of EU funding, which often drives higher sustainability standards. This represents a complete absence of sustainability considerations.