2025 was a strong year for me and for AV One. We delivered some brilliant projects, built great relationships, and helped organisations create spaces that genuinely work.
But we didn’t win everything.
And that’s worth talking about, because losing a tender is one thing. Losing a tender where the winning submission doesn’t fully meet the brief is something else entirely.
It’s not about ego or entitlement. It’s about understanding how decisions are made, how value is assessed, and why “cheapest” and “best” are very rarely the same thing in AV.
This feels like the right topic to kick off AV Unpacked – an evolution of what was previously Tech of the Month where I’ll be unpacking real-world AV topics, trends, and things that matter to businesses, not just talking about kit.
What’s really happening in these situations?
In AV procurement, quotes are often compared as if they’re like for like, when in reality, they’re not.
Two proposals might arrive with similar price tags, similar timelines, and similar headlines. But under the surface, they can differ significantly in:
- How closely they follow the brief
- The quality and certification of the technology
- System design and resilience
- Long-term support and maintenance
- Scalability and future readiness
When these differences aren’t fully understood or weighted, decisions can unintentionally favour short-term cost over long-term value.
Why “lowest price” isn’t always best value
AV systems don’t usually fail dramatically on day one.
The problems tend to surface later:
- Meetings that don’t quite work as expected
- Users losing confidence in the technology
- IT teams spending time firefighting
- Systems needing upgrades sooner than planned
Often, these issues trace back to compromises made at the quotation stage, elements that were excluded, downgraded, or assumed rather than clearly defined.
A lower price usually reflects something missing, not something extra.
How to compare AV quotes like for like
If you’re reviewing multiple AV proposals, here are some questions worth asking before making a decision:
- Does every solution fully meet the brief, or are there assumptions and omissions?
- Is the technology certified for the platforms you use (Teams, Zoom, Webex)?
- What’s included beyond hardware? (design, commissioning, training, documentation)
- What does support look like after installation?
- How long is the solution expected to last before major upgrades are required?
True like-for-like comparison means looking beyond line items and focusing on outcomes, reliability, and total cost of ownership.
Why this matters to us
At AV One, our approach has always been to deliver solutions that are compliant, robust, and fit for purpose, even when that means they might not be the cheapest option on paper.
That doesn’t always win every tender. But it does mean:
- No surprises post-install
- Better user experience
- Lower long-term support burden
- Systems that perform consistently, day after day
And over time, those things matter far more than an initial saving.
Final thoughts
Winning work matters.
But choosing the right solution matters more.
If you’re investing in AV, make sure you’re comparing proposals on value, performance, and longevity, not just price.
Because in AV, the real cost is rarely the number at the bottom of the quote.
That’s what AV Unpacked is all about: sharing insight and helping organisations make better, more informed decisions about the technology they rely on every day.