We are planning to build in 2022; the planning begins

A few excerpts from the offer of our favorites. I think it reads very well.

(1) the offer from the GC (2) a list of the expected incidental costs (3) a list of the expected additional costs for sample selection and special requests

And be particularly persistent with point 3 to clarify this realistically in advance. Our future neighbors with the same GC had to factor in buffers that turned out to be only rough estimates in reality. We stayed persistent and were with the craftsmen and were able to estimate much more precisely whether the standard construction service description was enough for us or whether we wanted something nicer.

I have the impression that this is quite a common trick of construction companies to first offer cheaply according to the construction service description and then leave the customer out in the rain during the sample selection. In the worst case, this threatens an additional financing requirement. Why this is so, I can only speculate. Presumably, they hope for more pleasant conversations and less renegotiation from customers when entering the race with a lower construction sum. After the signature, he can lean back quite relaxed and refer to the valid contract.

Addendum: this reads well in the sense that it is completely standard.

One primarily hopes for a quick conclusion, as often the number "bottom right" is mainly used as a comparison and decision criterion among several providers.

A few excerpts from the offer of our favorite. I think it reads very well.

I agree, but it usually depends on what is not explicitly mentioned (and still needed). Just as an example: We also have a load-bearing base slab, which according to the structural engineer had to be 40 cm thick plus 50 cm of layer-wise compacted gravel. Presumably, no general contractor in the world will offer that as standard, but you still have to factor in the additional costs for it.

And be especially persistent on point 3 to clarify that realistically in advance. Our future neighbors with the same general contractor had to factor in buffers that turned out to be rough estimates during implementation. We remained persistent and visited the craftsmen and were able to assess much more precisely whether the standard scope of work description was sufficient for us or if we wanted something nicer.

I have the impression that this is quite a common tactic among construction companies to first offer cheaply according to the scope of work description and then leave the customer out in the cold during the selection process. In the worst case, this threatens additional financing. Why this is so, I can only speculate. Presumably, they hope for easier conversations and less renegotiation from the customers when they start with a lower construction sum. After signing, they can just lean back calmly and refer to the valid contract.

Addendum:
that reads well insofar as it is completely standard.

10 cm laying distance
25 cm waterproof concrete in the bungalow
Interior thermography
was not standard with any of the other general contractors. And we spoke with a total of 10 general contractors.

A few excerpts from the offer of our favorite. I think it reads very well.

For the laying distance it says "on average". Make sure that 10cm is the maximum.