I review elevator modernization proposals before they go out to customers. Not as a salesperson—as the person who makes sure the promises are real. In Q1 2024, I rejected 16% of first drafts because they lacked a response-time penalty or a clear lead time. That’s not a statistic I’m proud of. It’s the reason I have a job.
So here’s my opinion, stated directly: the premium you pay for a guaranteed delivery window is not an extra cost. It’s an insurance premium. And in South Africa, where load shedding, parts import delays, and long service routes make uncertainty worse, that insurance is worth more than ever.
A quick detour, because I know some of you arrived by accident. If you were searching for the Roccat Kone AIMO dimensions, that’s a gaming mouse, not an elevator. A Genie garage door opener? Different product, different risk level. A glass water bottle? I don’t test those. And I’m definitely not the person to ask who makes the best heating and air conditioning units—that’s an HVAC question, not a vertical transportation one.
But those searches make my point. You should compare products on the criteria that matter for their use. With an elevator, the criteria are safety, reliability, and response time. Not the first number you see on a proposal.
What I See Every Week
The biggest red flag in my quality reviews isn’t a high price. It’s the phrase “best effort.” When a supplier says they’ll make a best effort to meet a deadline, they are not committing to anything. They are transferring the risk to you, the building owner.
Here’s a real example from March 2024. We lost a modernization bid for a 12-story office building in Sandton. The client chose a proposal that was R180,000 cheaper than ours. The supplier promised a response “within 24 hours.” Three months later, a door operator failed. The client called at 9am. The supplier arrived at 4pm the next day. Not because they were incompetent—because they had one technician covering thirty buildings.
Was that R180,000 saving worth a 31-hour response in an occupied building? The building manager told me later it wasn’t. But by then, the damage was done.
I’m not saying the cheaper supplier is always bad. I’m saying “within 24 hours” is not a commitment unless the contract says what happens when it’s missed.
The Cost of Uncertainty Doesn’t Show Up on the Quote
In my work, I compare every proposal against two standards: does it meet the specification, and does it tell the customer what happens if it doesn’t? If the answer to either is no, I reject it.
That may sound strict. But consider what happens when an elevator is down in a hospital, a mall, or a law firm. The loss of a lift isn’t just a technical issue. It affects patients moving between floors, retail traffic, and tenant confidence. A delay that lasts a week can cost more than the savings from choosing the lower bid.
I’m not a logistics engineer, so I can’t calculate optimal parts inventories for every supplier. What I can tell you from a quality perspective is this: if a supplier can’t name the lead time for a replacement part, they don’t have one.
- A response-time commitment with a penalty for missing it.
- Written parts lead times for critical components.
- A staging plan that keeps at least one elevator running during modernization.
- Clear acceptance criteria before the final payment is made.
These are the details that separate a two-day shutdown from a two-week shutdown.
Why the Lowest Bid Feels Safer
The lowest bid feels rational. It gives the budget owner a number they can defend. But in elevator modernization, the lowest bid rarely stays the lowest. There’s the change order for unforeseen conditions. There’s the replacement part that takes six weeks to ship. There’s the technician who doesn’t show up on the agreed day because they’re covering another site. Each of those events turns the low bid into a higher one—and adds stress.
I compare it to buying a glass water bottle. A cheap one may leak. It’s a small annoyance. If an elevator fails, you have a passenger inside. The insurer, the building owner, and the regulator all ask questions. That’s why the buying process has to be different.
The same logic applies to the HVAC question. Who makes the best heating and air conditioning units? It’s the wrong question. The right question is: which unit is best for my building’s size, climate, and usage? The same is true for elevators. The right supplier depends on the building, the traffic patterns, and your tolerance for downtime.
What This Means for KONE Elevators South Africa
For KONE elevators South Africa, modernization projects usually happen in occupied buildings. That means the schedule isn’t just about a date on a project plan. It affects tenants, security, and building access. A delay creates a chain of costs that never appears in the original quote.
I’ve seen this from both sides. In 2022, I insisted on adding a penalty clause to a modernization contract for a hospital. The vendor said it was unnecessary. I held the line. Two years later, when the hospital had a main controller failure, the penalty clause didn’t make the arrival time faster on its own, but it changed the supplier’s incentive. They flew the parts in overnight instead of shipping by road. That decision saved the hospital roughly R60,000 in downtime.
Some people will say I’m biased because I work for a global elevator company. That’s fair. But my bias isn’t toward our brand. It’s toward contracts that have consequences. When I review our own proposals, I apply the same rule. I’d rather lose a bid than put our name on a promise that has no meaningful consequence if we miss it.
If Your Budget Is Fixed, Don’t Cut the Certainty
The most common objection I hear is: we can’t afford the premium. I understand. But if your budget is fixed, the solution is not to accept a vague response time. The solution is to reduce the scope.
Modernize the busiest elevator first. Phase the rest. Leave the expensive finishes for next year. But keep the response-time guarantee. Because the one thing you cannot afford is a supplier who can’t tell you when a technician will arrive.
So, yes, I believe in paying for certainty. Not because speed is always necessary, but because uncertainty has a cost. It shows up in missed deadlines, frustrated tenants, and emergency repairs. It doesn’t show up in the initial quote, but it always shows up.
In 2025, I’m not approving any proposal—ours or a competitor’s—that doesn’t answer this question: what happens if you don’t meet the deadline? If the answer is “that won’t happen,” I ask to see the penalty clause. If there isn’t one, that’s not certainty. That’s hope.
