Almost every government tender in Uganda, and many private ones too, asks bidders to attach a MAF: a Manufacturer’s Authorisation Form. It sits in the standard bidding documents for ministries, departments and agencies, and most people fill it in without asking why it is there.
I understand where it came from. Decades ago there were hardly any local distributors. When a company bid to supply government, the only way to be sure the equipment was genuine, and that someone stood behind it, was a letter from the factory.
The market has changed since then. The form has not. From what I have seen on the ground over many years, it now does more harm than good.
What the MAF actually encourages
A MAF pushes bidders to deal straight with the factory abroad, or to buy through an exporter in Dubai. The equipment arrives, gets installed and the project is signed off. Then the problems start:
- No local spare parts. One failed part can mean a 4 to 12 week wait, plus shipping and duty.
- No local warranty. Faulty units have to be shipped back at the client’s cost.
- Only the company that imported the system can support it, and sometimes not even them.
- The money leaves the country, and the taxes are paid abroad.
What a local distributor brings
Over the last ten years or so, more and more brands have appointed distributors in Uganda. A proper distributor:
- keeps local stock, so delivery is often faster than a special import
- holds spare parts, and standby units in case of failure
- has trained engineers for second-level support when the installer cannot solve a problem
- gives a local warranty, and some brands offer up to 7 years
- trains many local installers, so the client is never stuck with one company
- pays its taxes here
Factory direct or local distributor: a quick comparison
| Direct from the factory abroad | Through the local distributor | |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-sales advice and design | Flights and hotel for a visiting engineer | Local team, no travel cost |
| After-sales support | Phone or video call, often charged | Local engineers who can come to site |
| Warranty | Client pays to ship faulty units back | Local warranty handled here |
| Second-level technical support | Engineer flown in, charged per day or hour | Covered under warranty or at low cost, no flights |
| Spare parts | 4 to 12 weeks wait | Available locally |
| Trained installers | One or two people trained during the job | Many local installers trained every week |
| Price and import channel | Ex-works, sometimes brought in through informal channels | Local price, imported in bulk through proper channels |
| Taxes | Paid abroad | Paid in full in Uganda |
You would not buy a Ferrari without a mechanic
Clients often see a product online that looks great and want exactly that. I understand. But you would not bring a Ferrari to a town with no Ferrari mechanic and no spare parts, unless you are ready to fly parts in every time something breaks.
So why do it with a conference system, a video wall, a display or a network switch?
Stuck with one installer
When an installer imports a product from Dubai or straight from the factory, the client is tied to that installer. Nobody else has the training or the parts to support it. Often the product is not even meant for this region, so the brand’s regional office will not support it either.
When the equipment comes through the local distributor, the client stays free. If the relationship with the installer ends for any reason, another trained installer can take over, and the distributor still supports the system.
What I have seen with my own eyes
I will not name the institutions. These are public buildings, and if you work in this industry you may recognise some of them.
- A government agency in Kampala has a conference and interpretation system from one of the best-known European brands. I estimate it at around $200,000. It looks fine. It does not work at all. As far as I can tell, the company that supplied it could not support it, and no proper local training was given.
- A university auditorium was funded and supplied by a foreign donor with some of the best equipment in the world. The donor’s team installed it and left. Today about 90% of the system is not working. That is roughly $100,000 of equipment.
- A public utility’s research and conference venue was fitted out by a foreign contractor with top brands. Four to five years later, almost everything needs replacing because there are no spare parts and no local warranty. Just ask how many different types of microphones they have bought in those five years.
- A major public institution did the right thing in its main hall and hired a consultant. The consultant proposed a system that would have taken it ten years ahead, but an internal technical person advised procurement against it. Meanwhile, smaller rooms in the same building were fitted with systems that have no local warranty or support.
These are AV examples because AV is my field. I am sure the same story repeats with IT, CCTV and other systems across government, and in other sectors too.
What I propose
I am not against the MAF. If a brand or solution has no distributor in Uganda, asking for a MAF makes sense.
But where a brand has a local distributor, tenders should ask for a Distributor’s Authorisation Form (DAF) or letter, issued by the local distributor and backed by the manufacturer’s letter appointing that distributor. That one document proves the equipment is genuine, and that there is local stock, spare parts, warranty and support behind it.
If government made buying through local distributors a condition, brands that are not here yet would have a reason to open offices or appoint distributors. Some manufacturers already encourage their distributors to assemble products locally and give longer warranties.
This fits the government’s own Buy Uganda Build Uganda (BUBU) policy. Supporting local distributors is good for the economy, but it also does something simpler: it makes sure the systems government pays for keep working.
This is not about one distributor. Across the country, organisations are spending a lot of money on systems that do not last, do not work, or cannot get support after installation. That is money spent badly, and much of it could be saved if buyers knew what to ask for and what to insist on.
So this is a call to procurement teams, and also to the PPDA to review this old requirement. Most entities simply follow the standard bidding documents, so one change there would reach every public tender in the country.
If you work in procurement or as a consultant and want to talk about how to word this in a tender, talk to us at PRO AV Africa or message me on WhatsApp.
References
Photos: Pexels.
