Right of reply: Who wants EBOMAF?

For some time now, the Bonkoungou Mahamadou et Fils Company (EBOMAF) has been the subject of various proceedings of intent in the media. The aim of veiled attacks is to cast doubt on its effective participation in notices of tenders. They continue to argue that this public works company (TP) is supported by the support it can obtain from most public procurement. Such allegations can only be weapons of competitors who really do not have the technical and human means to assert and impose themselves in such a demanding field as that of construction.

Indeed, it is undeniable that the public works sector has grown considerably in recent years in Burkina Faso. The liberalisation of this market, and in particular its opening up to national small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), has enabled local economic operators to seize this opportunity to break a certain unnamed monopoly previously enjoyed by well-known companies. Although it is also impossible to deny the arrival of venture companies attracted by the very juicy manna without having the capacity to carry out the work.

EBOMAF is one of the companies in Burkina Faso that have understood that they can only express themselves on the country's construction sites and across borders through the quality of the works produced by experienced staff with state-of-the-art equipment in the construction sector. This concern guided the Bonkoungou Mahamadou et Fils Company (EBOMAF) in its growth plan so well that on today's day, it is one of the few companies to benefit from everything it takes to build a road. In fact, apart from the construction materials and consumables EBOMAF pays in the execution of its contracts, it does not use any external material and technical support.

This is evidenced by the recent creation of the Roads and Various Networks (VRD), which continues to attract Burkinabe and foreign visitors. EBOMAF's reputation scares some of its competitors to the point that they are looking for a lice on a shaved skull. Former monopoly beneficiaries are severely shaken in their leadership and venture companies are clustering on it. These companies lacking arguments in the field of competition maintain misconceptions about market allocations when they are not retained. " The lie may run, but the truth ends up catching him up. "

The work of Fada N-Gourma was the subject of an open tender and the work of Ouahigouya was the subject of a limited consultation in which several companies took part (see tender forms). Where are they? If EBOMAF was selected, it was because it submitted technically good and financially reasonable offers. Some companies have been very greedy and adventurous companies technically unable to carry out the works. It is therefore aberrant, or even false, to suggest that EBOMAF enjoys protection that allows it to win tenders without going through normal public procurement procedures. Success in this demanding environment requires an indisputable financial capacity, recognized human, material and technical skills to take over its competitors.

No sincere Burkina Faso can today deny the fact that EBOMAF now has the logistical and human resources at the cutting edge and the partner banks needed to build any public works and complete them in time.

The turnover of our company is not the same as that of some of these competitors who today defend a lie on his back. There are, however, several examples where firms have been contracting contracts whose total amount of only one exceeds all EBOMAF's annual contracts. Those who have long benefited from the quasi-monopoly of public works in Burkina Faso have been for how long without anyone moving? The answers to these questions will allow each other to understand that EBOMAF is neither this dinosaur nor the favorite of the public procurement allocations that its competitors want to make believe.

In reality, the complainants are those who are losing speed and who have chosen the media route to harm our reputation. These media harassments on public procurement awarded to our company are nothing but destabilizing advertising in order to harm EBOMAF, just as the previous ones who had to assume its CEO was evacuated to Europe in a comatose state, etc. Taxpayers appreciate whether EBOMAF is doing its job or not?

The Communications Officer

On Monday 14 September 2009