The management of European Union structural funds in the archipelago's established tourist destinations faces rigorous scrutiny within government agencies. The evaluation committee of the Gran Canaria Tourism Board has placed a contract under the Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan focused on the design, creation, and implementation of tourism products in Maspalomas under close scrutiny. Administrative concerns arose after the opening of the financial bids, a technical milestone that revealed an aggressive price war among the twenty-two participating firms. Government officials have issued a restrictive opinion recommending the immediate disqualification of the lowest bidder for failing to demonstrate the minimum sustainability of the project.
The opening of the financial bids revealed an insurmountable budget gap within the consulting sector, leading to a parade of operators with radically different financial approaches. Innotur Consultoría e Innovación SL positioned itself at the absolute limit of the tender with a proposal of €72.150,00. Auren Consultores LPA, SL came very close to this limit with a bid of €70.300,00, which raised no suspicion of irregularity. Meanwhile, Oncampus Training FRT formalized its participation in the institutional bidding process with a budget of €69.550,00.
The middle class of the public tender was characterized by proposals that the contracting committee validated without technical issues. Braintrust Consulting Services, SL priced its work at €68.619,10. Consultora para el Desarrollo Exterior Canario, SLU defended the viability of its services, setting a price of €66.227,65. Consulta-AYC-On SL also participated in the process with a bid of €65.000,00.
The group of bidders whose prices remained around the average for the Canary Islands market continued with Océano de Experiencias, SL, which submitted a bid of €64.093,00. Turismo Integral en Red submitted its documentation with an estimated budget of €63.130,00. Similarly, Minimilks marketing & branding sl formalized its bid to modernize the southern destination with an offer of €62.755,50.
Large specialized corporations and consulting firms also sought to participate in the Maspalomas tender. THR Tourism Industry Advisors, SL submitted a bid of €62.595,00. Dinamiza Asesores SLNE presented its own cost estimates, setting the price for the lot at €58.850,00. The multinational KPMG Asesores, SL decided to compete in the public tender with a budget of €58.090,00.
The absolute mathematical equality became evident in the middle range of the financial bids submitted electronically. Aninver Development Partners SL registered a proposal of €57.720,01. This figure was identical to the cent by Beta Group Services SAS, Spanish Branch, which also valued the deployment of the service at €57.720,01. Viajes Fisterra, SL was close behind, with its team setting a fixed price of €56.900,00.
The final group of operators who passed the technical quality screening consisted of consulting firms with a more modest profile. Redflexion Consultores, SL submitted a bid of €54.020,00 to the island administration. The last operator directly approved was Baldrick & Munitz SL (BiM Consultors), whose bid was €51.306,50. Geocyl Consultoria SL completed this group by pricing the execution of the project phases at €49.578,45.
The controversy surrounding the tender centered on the three companies that exceeded the minimum financial requirements of the tender specifications. Astibot Ingeniería Informática Robótica Domótica SL was deemed to have submitted an abnormally low bid of €45.689,00. Valora Consultores de Gestión, SL, found itself in a similarly precarious situation after submitting a bid of €37.666,14. The most extreme example of this aggressive strategy was EA Brand New Marketing, SL, whose bid of €32.100,00 triggered an investigation into its potential for abnormally low bids.
EA Brand New Marketing's financial defense has been deemed incomplete and unsustainable by the auditors. The company attempted to justify its low prices by citing the use of standardized methodologies and its own office infrastructure. The technical report refutes this argument, warning that the use of generic templates creates an unacceptable risk of a lack of specialization. The evaluators maintain that the budget offered is insufficient to cover the actual costs of a deployment of this nature.
The mathematical analysis revealed that the firm's financial statement only details an item of €23.400,00 dedicated to personnel costs. The document omits any numerical breakdown of the amounts corresponding to profit margin, travel expenses for in-person micro-consultations, and the impact of the IGIC (Canary Islands General Indirect Tax). This lack of accounting transparency makes it impossible to verify whether the company can meet the tender requirements. The resolution proposes the immediate disqualification of the abnormally low bid based on the Public Sector Contracts Law.
