Energy Myth #6: Do Tenders Only Make Sense at Millions of kWh?
Updated: 1 day ago
“Running a tender is not worthwhile for our smaller properties.” That assessment is too narrow if it considers only individual meters. Aggregating supply points can create new procurement options for professional real estate portfolios, without requiring millions of kWh at each property.
Consumption volume is not a tender threshold
Small supply points can also be put out to tender. Whether a separate procedure is worthwhile depends on the offers available and the procurement effort, as well as consumption. A portfolio offers another option: combining several small requirements into a meaningful aggregate volume.
The frequently cited 100,000 kWh threshold concerns electricity metering in Germany, not the minimum size of a tender. Under section 55 of Germany’s Metering Point Operation Act, consumption above this annual level is generally measured using a time series of meter readings or, where necessary, quarter-hourly registered load measurements. This does not establish a general tender threshold for electricity or gas.
Why the myth persists
Looking at smaller units, ancillary facilities and individual parts of buildings in isolation often reveals limited demand alongside relatively high administrative effort. Existing contracts may consequently go unreviewed. Whether their terms remain competitive can only be established by comparing offers.
Aggregation changes that assessment. The relevant volume is the portfolio being tendered together, rather than just the consumption recorded by each meter. A clearly defined package can interest additional suppliers.
What aggregation can enable
More competition: A meaningful combined volume can encourage additional suppliers to participate.
Better terms: Comparable offers provide a basis for negotiating prices and contract conditions. They do not guarantee a lower price.
Lower process costs: A coordinated tender can replace numerous individual requests for offers and separate discussions.
Simpler administration: Consistent terms and central points of contact can make the portfolio easier to manage. Whether a single contract is possible also depends on ownership structures and the supply model.
Market access for smaller properties: Their requirements become part of a professional tender and can be assessed alongside larger supply points.
What matters in practice
Aggregation still requires careful preparation. Consumption profiles, delivery periods, notice deadlines and contracting parties must be compatible or reflected in suitable tender lots. A reliable data foundation for an energy tender helps suppliers understand the requirements.
Owners, asset managers and property managers should therefore consider energy costs and internal workload together. The NeoBid platform aggregates supply points for coordinated tenders and supports transparent offer comparisons. Our article on energy procurement for real estate portfolios explains how this fits into the wider procurement process.
Conclusion: A portfolio approach expands the options
Low consumption at individual supply points is not a general reason to rule out a tender. Aggregation can support competition and more efficient processes. The portfolio composition, quality of preparation and terms actually offered remain decisive.
To assess which supply points could be tendered together, discuss your portfolio with NeoBid. We can help review its requirements and prepare the procurement process.
