Purchase of subscription for the Vmware virtualization system used in the City of Krakow

… Krakow. The division of the contract into lots would not be technically or organisationally justified, as all subscriptions must be assigned to the same environment and ensure a uniform duration and consistent mandate. The possible splitting of the contract could lead to unjustified difficulties in managing subscriptions, billing and handling producer support, as well as increase the risk of inconsistencies in terms of duration or allocation of subscriptions to the contracting authority’s environment. Moreover, the splitting of the contract would not increase the competitiveness of the procedure, as the subject matter of the contract includes the delivery of standard subscriptions of a VMware manufacturer with predetermined parameters, and economic operators compete only for the price of an identical product. Taking into account the nature of the subject matter of the contract, its homogeneity, the manufacturer's requirements for the licensing model and the need to ensure the consistency and continuity of the virtualization environment, the Contracting Authority considered that dividing the contract into lots would be unjustified. Waiving the division of the contract into lots does not deprive small and medium-sized enterprises of the possibility of participating in the procedure. 3. The contracting authority does not require the performance of the contract by sheltered workshops, social cooperatives or other contractors covered by the provision of Art. 1 of the Public Procurement Law Act of 11 September 2019 (Journal of Laws of Laws 2026, item 793 as amended), hereinafter referred to as ‘the Law’. 4. Due to the nature of this contract (delivery), the Ordering Party does not require the employment of persons (by the Contractor or subcontractors) on the basis of an employment relationship. 5. The contracting authority does not provide for the possibility of awarding the contracts referred to in Article 214(1)(b) CTMR. 1 point 8 of the Act. 6. The contracting authority does not allow variants to be submitted. 7. The contracting authority does not provide for an electronic auction. 8. Prior to initiating the procedure, the contracting authority did not carry out preliminary market consultations. 9. In the present proceedings, the contracting authority does not require the Contractors to submit the evidence in question. 10. The Contracting Authority shall, within the limits laid down in Article 462 et seq. of the Act, allow the Contractor to perform the subject-matter of the contract using subcontractors. The contractor who intends to subcontract part of the contract shall indicate in the tender the parts of the contract which he intends to subcontract and the names of any subcontractors, if known. 11. Justification for the application of the 100% price criterion - Quality requirements referred to in Art. 2 of the Act, the Ordering Party specified in the description of the subject of the contract contained in the model contract. · 1. The subject of the order is the purchase of a subscription for the Vmware virtualization system used in the City of Krakow. A detailed description of the subject-matter of the contract is set out in the model contract, which is attached as Annex 9 to the ToR. 2.The contracting authority in this procedure does not divide the contract into lots or allow for the possibility of submitting partial tenders. The contracting authority did not divide the contract into lots because the subject of