1454 objects were put up for sale by state authorities\nduring the first 4 months (from August to December 2018) in small privatization\nauctions through the system of ProZorro. Sales.
\n
\nOnly 423 of them were successful.
\n
\nWhy did it happen so?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the analytical note \u201cWhat determines the effectiveness and profitability of small privatization auctions. The Analysis of auctions of ProZorro. Sales.\u201d, we have analysed the factors that affect the performance and profitability of the auctions.
The most important factor is the number of its participants.
The analysis shows the more participants, the greater likelihood that the auction will end effectively, and it will be profitable. However, the infinite growth in the number of participants does not bring any particular changes: the probability of successful privatization is approximately the same for the auctions with three and 25 participants.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the analytical note, there is also a breakdown by characteristics\nof participants and auction winners (legal or physical persons, men or women,\nparticipants from the same region as the organizer is, or from other regions)\nin order to understand whether additional efforts should be made to attract\nadditional participants, which then can be more likely to become the winners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Other important factors are:
\n
\nwho is organizing an auction (which government body);
\nhow many times the object is put up for sale;
\nwhat site announces the privatization.
\nIn the analytical note, we have also analysed the \u201cbottlenecks\u201d of the\nauctions. Among the risk criteria, the following are singled out:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nthe presence of questions without answers \u2013 it shows that the organizer does\nnot fully perform their duties;<\/p>\n\n\n\n
disqualification of more than half of the participants\n\u2013 it indicates that the organizer may be in collusion with some participants or\nuses some formal rules too strictly, sacrificing success and profitability;<\/p>\n\n\n\n
competitive auctions where the price of the winner has\nnot changed during the trading \u2013 it proves a potential conspiracy between the\nparticipants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As a result, we have found out that more than 25% of\nsuccessful auctions are potentially risky.
\n
\nWe recommend
\n
\nto involve more participants. To attract the attention of more\nparticipants, more publicity of ads is needed about small privatization. It is\nalso desirable to conduct a survey of potential participants (e.g. those who\nviewed the announcement of the auction, but decided not to participate in it)\nabout the reasons for the refusal to participate, as well as surveying the participants\nabout the problems faced when using the system of ProZorro. Sales. This can be\ndone by platforms or ProZorro. Sales.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To design some risk analysis tools for ProZorro. Sales. This can be done by ProZorro or non-governmental organizations. To conduct trainings for auction organizers. More productive organizers can conduct trainings for less productive ones. This can be done by platforms, Prozorro.Sales. or other more successful participants. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
1454 objects were put up for sale by state authorities during the first 4 months (from August to December 2018) in small privatization auctions through the system of ProZorro. Sales. Only 423 of them were successful. Why did it happen so? In the analytical note \u201cWhat determines the effectiveness and profitability of small privatization auctions. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[404,197,143],"tags":[568],"experts":[216],"news_type":[140],"class_list":["post-8345","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-business-en","category-research-list-en","category-home-news-en","tag-business-and-investment-en","experts-dariia-mykhailyshyna-en","news_type-researches"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8345","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8345"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8345\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8345"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8345"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8345"},{"taxonomy":"experts","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/experts?post=8345"},{"taxonomy":"news_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ces.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news_type?post=8345"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}