Jane Black
mailto:[FOI #13885 email]
17 July 2009
Dear Ms Black
RFI20090957 - Freedom of Information request
Thank you for your email of 30 June 2009 requesting the following information:
1. How much was spent by the BBC on the experimental technology prototype Shownar.com?
2. Details of the tendering process, including where and when the tender was published?
The reference number for your request is RFI20090957.
As explained below we will not be providing you with the answer to your first question about spend
but have provided the answer to your second question regarding process.
The BBC contracted Schulze & Webb to build the prototype and also licensed data from three
other external companies Yahoo!, Nielsen Online and Twingly.
1. How much was spent by the BBC on the experimental technology prototype
Shownar.com?
In accordance with section 1(1) of the Act, the BBC confirms information relating to the spend on
Shownar is held by the BBC. However, the BBC will not be providing you with this information as
we consider it to be exempt under section 43(2) of the Act. This is because disclosure would be
likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the BBC, the supplier Schulze & Webb and the data
providers Yahoo!, Nielsen Online and Twingly by:
• prejudicing the negotiating position of the BBC in any ongoing or potential future contractual
negotiations with any other suppliers of similar goods and services. Disclosure of the spend
information may result in a ratchet effect among bids from other suppliers. Since these
companies will know that a minimum level of funds was paid for a particular type of service,
they would have an incentive to coordinate their prices and only accept bids beyond that
level, whereas they may previously have accepted a fee below that level.
• weakening the BBC’s position in a competitive environment by revealing market-sensitive
information or information of potential usefulness to competitors. The disclosure of
information could have the effect of distorting the market for such services, increasing the
likelihood of the BBC’s competitors coordinating their bids against the BBC for these kind of
services.
• disclosing the fee paid to suppliers by the BBC is likely to discourage these companies from
contracting with the BBC vis-à-vis its commercial rivals, due to the increased risk of
publicity regarding their deals. Since the BBC is one of a small group of broadcasters that
is subject to the disclosure obligations of FOIA, the cost-benefit of contracting with the BBC
vis-à-vis a commercial broadcaster that is not subject to those obligations weighs heavier
on the cost side.
• prejudicing the negotiating position of Schulze & Webb in any ongoing or potential future
contractual negotiations with any other customers for similar goods and services.
Disclosure of the spend information may limit Schulze & Webb’s ability to flex charging to
other customers therefore having a potential detrimental impact on the commercial revenue
of Schulze & Webb
• weakening Schulze & Webb’s position in a competitive environment by revealing market-
sensitive information or information of potential usefulness to competitors;
• weakening Yahoo!’s, Nielsen Online’s and Twingly ’s position in a competitive environment
by revealing market-sensitive information or information of potential usefulness to
competitors;
As section 43 is a qualified exemption, in accordance with section 2(2) of the Act, we have
considered the public interest factors in this case. Specifically, whether in all the circumstances of
the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing
the spend information.
In favour of disclosure, we recognised that there is a public interest in the following:
• that there is transparency in the accountability of the BBC for public funds;
• that the BBC is using public money effectively, and that the BBC is getting value for money
when purchasing goods and services;
• that the BBC’s commercial activities (including the procurement process) are conducted in
an open and honest way
On the other hand, in considering factors that might weigh in favour of the public interest in
withholding, we took into account:
• that companies, or individuals provide the BBC with commercially sensitive information, so
that the BBC is able to make robust decisions regarding its suppliers of goods and services,
including ensuring that the BBC obtains the best value for money from each transaction;
• that the BBC maintains a strong bargaining position vis-à-vis suppliers during contractual
negotiations in order to ensure that the licence fee is spent effectively;
• that the competitive position of companies in their particular market is not disadvantaged by
doing business with the BBC. It would not be in the public interest to disclose sensitive
information about a particular company if that information would be likely to be used by
competitors to gain a competitive advantage.
I am satisfied, in terms of section 2 of the Act, that in all the circumstances of this case, the public
interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
2. Details of the tendering process, including where and when the tender was published?
The invitation to tender for the technology was put out by a BBC Senior Technical Project Manager
on the 16 December 2008 to six companies with matching skill-sets on the BBC Future Media
Approved Supplier List (http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/newmediacommissioning/asl.pl).
The BBC's Future Media Commissioning Process is provided here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/commissioning/futuremedia/procurement.shtml
As per this published commissioning process invitations to tender for external commissions at the
expected price point (ie between £50,000 and £140,000) do not need to be published but should
go to a number of suppliers from the Approved Supplier List. This particular invitation to tender was
sent to six suppliers on the Approved Supplier list.
The tenders received were scored against an agreed set of criteria based on the invitation to
tender by three senior BBC staff – a Senior Producer Multiplatform, a Senior Technical Project
Manager and a Senior Portfolio Executive.
Schulze & Webb scored most highly and were awarded the contract on the 29th December 2008.
Other suppliers who tendered were contacted on the same day to let them know they had not been
successful.
When choosing data suppliers, the BBC looked at a number of different suppliers, discussed our
specific requirements with some of them and then made our decision based on who could best
meet our requirements regarding general web search, blog search and microblog search results.
Appeal Rights
If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to an internal review by a BBC senior
manager. Please contact us at the address above, explaining what you would like us to review
and including your reference number.
If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can
appeal to the Information Commissioner. The contact details are: Information Commissioner's
Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF, telephone 01625 545 700 or
see www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk
Yours Sincerely
Dave Gregory
Head of Planning and Business Analysis
BBC Vision
