Contact us
  1. Oversight & Council Questions System
  2. Case videos
  3. A single bidder: does it always mean something is wrong? Three explanations, three kinds of traces

EP21 · Issue discovery

A single bidder: does it always mean something is wrong? Three explanations, three kinds of traces

For single-bidder tenders, list three possible explanations and the traces each one leaves, then check cases one by one to decide which to investigate first.

Capability
Issue discovery
Published
Length
1:46
Format
Shorts (9:16)
Book a 30-minute call Watch on YouTube ↗

Original YouTube title: 只有一家來投，就一定有問題嗎？三種解釋，三種痕跡

The method behind this video

  1. Pick up from the previous question: nearly 60% of Pingtung County Government tenders drew a single bidder. A single bidder does not by itself prove a problem, so the approach switches to a doctor's differential diagnosis: first list the possible illnesses, then the other symptoms each one would leave.
  2. List three explanations: the job is genuinely hard and looks the same nationwide; the law allows it, since after a first round fails for lack of three bidders, a single bidder can win the second round (Article 48 of the Government Procurement Act); or someone knew in advance.
  3. Write down the traces each explanation leaves: if the job is hard, you see a large project with demanding specifications and few bidders on similar projects nationwide; if the law allows it, you see an earlier failed round; if someone knew in advance, you see a technically simple project, the shortest tender period, a newly founded winner, and many bidders on similar projects in the neighboring county.
  4. Check case by case: how many failed a first round, how many are technically simple, how many were won by new companies. Each case goes under the explanation it matches, and that decides which to investigate first.
  5. Cite the policy news: according to United Daily News on 15 November 2025, a draft amendment to the procurement law would drop the three-bidder rule for opening bids; according to Business Today on 9 March 2026, the Public Construction Commission said the bill would not go to the Legislative Yuan this session.

Related videos

Sources

Transcript

Show transcript

Last time I said that nearly 60% of Pingtung County Government tenders drew only one bidder. Lots of people asked: so does that mean something is wrong?

Not necessarily. Today let's look at it a different way.

When a doctor sees you have a fever, they don't jump straight to a diagnosis. They first think: which illnesses could this be? And what other symptoms would each one leave?

A single bidder has at least three possible explanations.

One: the job really is hard, and only a few companies in all of Taiwan can do it. Metro construction, for example, is done by the same few big contractors. If that's the case, the project is large, the specifications are very demanding, and it looks the same nationwide. Nothing wrong there.

Two: the law allows it. On the first round, three bidders are needed to open bids; if it fails, on the second round a single bidder can win. If that's the case, you'll see that it failed a round first.

Three: someone knew in advance. If that's the case, you'll see a technically simple project, the tender period squeezed to the minimum, and a newly founded company winning, while the same kind of project in the neighboring county draws many bidders. Very strange.

The three explanations leave different traces. So next, we'll check case by case: how many failed a first round? How many are technically simple? How many were won by new companies?

Now it's your turn. If you were a prosecutor, which would you investigate first? If you're a contractor, why didn't you bid? Tell me in the comments below.

By the way, last year the Public Construction Commission wanted to scrap the three-bidder threshold, and this March it said the bill won't go forward this session. Lucky, or else in future one bidder would do it on the first round.

English translation of the Chinese voice-over. Personal names are replaced with job titles or "(name omitted)".

Your district can produce questions like these.

Start with a 30-minute call about the issues you want to follow and your office's daily workload.

Book a 30-minute call See the Oversight & Council Questions System →

More case videos

  • EP17 · Long-form

    Number check

    Pingtung's Department of Labor and Youth Development: the youth budget nearly quadrupled while the labor budget fell by more than 20%. Labor comes first in its name

    The department's budget for 2023 and for this year, the Ministry of Labor's inspection figures, and the selection record of a NT$430 million building project, set side by side.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP06B · Shorts

    Number check

    2,018 community group grants from Pingtung County, and a report that is NT$22,760,000 off

    2,872 grant line items added up row by row, then checked against the report's summary-page total and the previous version of the notice.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP09 · Shorts

    Number check

    Nearly 60% of Pingtung County tenders drew a single bidder. Do you have to dream it up before you can bid?

    958 award notices read one by one for the number of bidders, to work out how many tenders drew only one.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP08 · Shorts

    Petition routing

    NT$13,190,000 to repair a leased building, with only a year and a half left before it goes back? Pingtung's Artisan Town

    The grant's stated purpose did not match how the building is used, so the issue went to the National Audit Office, which has the authority to act; it has replied that it will open a special investigation.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP14 · Shorts

    Issue discovery

    The county's youth channel: 26 of its latest 30 videos have under 100 views

    Public view counts set against the project funding in the award notice, to find a question worth asking.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP18 · Shorts

    Issue discovery

    What if a county voucher scheme used the "three-shop system"? Could an event like this go ahead? (Part 2)

    The structure of the three-shop system applied to a voucher event, producing a hypothetical question the responsible agency can be asked to answer.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP18 · Shorts

    Issue discovery

    Why is Japanese pachinko legal? The three-shop system, one legal step at a time (Part 1)

    Explain the three-shop system first, then carry the same structure into Part 2’s hypothetical county voucher scheme.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP20 · Shorts

    Number check

    Seven panelists: how many votes do insiders need? A purely hypothetical calculation

    A hypothetical seven-member committee shows how its roster, attendance and votes can change the selection structure.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP15 · Shorts

    Issue discovery

    Applicants miss out on the entrepreneurship course while an instructor keeps winning contracts

    Line up government training, park tenancy and tender records to question a park shop’s role in managing Artisan Town.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP12 · Shorts

    Issue discovery

    Young people do not stay. Has the county followed up?

    Use audit findings to examine demand, funding and departure reasons in a youth employment grant, turning retention into an answerable question.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP11 · Shorts

    Petition routing

    Blacklisted by the county? A lawful records request meets the same barrier

    Compare the legal basis of a records request with the agency’s reply, then ask why an information request was treated as a repeat petition.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP10 · Shorts

    Number check

    Communications selection panels: nearly 60% insiders, only 3.4% academics

    Compare selection panels from 55 communications-department contracts with the median across 18 county agencies.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP19 · Shorts

    Petition routing

    Artisan Town’s seismic assessment: the county replies “Article 173, no action”

    Follow the assessment, opening and later safety listing to pursue a seismic report that cost NT$900,000.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP25 · Long-form

    Issue discovery

    One company cleaned Pingtung County Hall for eleven years, with one bidder for four years: why I held this story

    Track eleven years of cleaning procurement and include competition conditions and frontline cleaners’ wage protections in the questions.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP24 · Long-form

    Number check

    Pingtung contracts over NT$100 million: awards within 1% of budget? Checking three figures one by one

    Recalculate budget, award price and bidder count, then use the same method to compare counties and cities.

    Watch and see the method →

  • EP23 · Long-form

    Petition routing

    What does a local government look like when no one above it is watching? No Control Yuan members, no agency taking up prosecutors’ findings, county replies citing Article 173

    Trace sixteen petitions and agency replies to locate where oversight stopped, then turn to public accounts and procurement checks.

    Watch and see the method →

← Back to case videos