Specialist · Member since 2026 · 20 posts · 10 votes
I've been thinking a lot about how property owners and managers decide when to put a major project out for competitive bid versus when they just call "their guy."
We all have vendors we trust. The handyman who knows your buildings. The HVAC tech who answers at 10 PM. That relationship has real value in an emergency.
But where is the line?
If a project is under $5k, do you bother getting multiple bids? $10k? $25k?
At what point does speed and loyalty start to cost more than it's worth?
I'm genuinely curious how others are thinking about this. What's your threshold? Is it a hard number, or does it depend on the type of work? When an investor has several properties affected by storm damage, is it worth the time to shop every property? Would your opinion change if someone else did the legwork and brought you options?
I don't have a strong opinion here; just trying to understand how the industry actually operates on the ground. Would love to hear your thoughts!
Investor · Charleston, SC · Member since 2018 · 198 posts · 84 votes
2mo
I use two thresholds, not one.
For urgent repair work, speed wins until the number crosses the preapproved repair limit, usually 500 to 1,000 depending on the property.
For planned work, anything that changes the asset or repeats across several properties gets scoped once and bid at least twice, because the expensive mistake is comparing vendor personalities instead of comparing the same scope.
Investor · Charleston, SC · Member since 2018 · 198 posts · 84 votes
2mo
I use two thresholds, not one.
For urgent repair work, speed wins until the number crosses the preapproved repair limit, usually 500 to 1,000 depending on the property.
For planned work, anything that changes the asset or repeats across several properties gets scoped once and bid at least twice, because the expensive mistake is comparing vendor personalities instead of comparing the same scope.
For me the threshold shifts a lot depending on whether the expense is something I saw coming or not.
If I already know a system is aging out (say a water heater that's 10+ years old), I've had time to think about it, so I'll usually get at least one comparison bid even for something under $5k, since there's no time pressure forcing me toward "my guy."
Emergencies are a different story. When something fails with zero warning, loyalty wins almost every time, because the cost of downtime or a tenant with no hot water is worth more than whatever I'd save shopping around.
So my real threshold isn't a dollar amount, it's how much advance notice I had. The less warning, the more I lean on the relationship instead of the bid process.
Property Manager · Fort Worth, TX · Member since 2014 · 77 posts · 30 votes
2mo
I'll give you the honest answer: the bid threshold question is the wrong question. Ask this instead — does your PM make money when the invoice gets bigger? If yes, doesn't matter if it's $500 or $50,000, you're negotiating against someone with a stake in the outcome. I've run maintenance at zero markup for 30 years — every invoice, actual cost, no cut for me. That's what lets me call "my guy" on a $200 leak and shop three bids on a $15k roof without an owner ever wondering which one I picked for a kickback. Practically... anything under $1,500 and non-emergency, I'm calling the trusted vendor. Above that, or anything with real judgment calls (roofs, foundations, HVAC replacement), get two bids minimum. But fix the incentive problem first. The threshold is a symptom.