Solutions · Finance
This is a reallocation, not a new line item.
You are already funding floor quality assurance. The question is whether that money buys twenty-four staged visits a year per store, reported weeks late, or continuous measurement of every consultative conversation.
What you get
Three arguments, all of them about the budget rather than the product.
Displacement, not new spend
The platform fee comes out of Store Operations and displaces the mystery shopping and retail audit line. The seat licence comes out of Learning, which is already budgeted per head. Two existing lines, not a third one.
A number you can audit
Coverage is published weekly, results are measured with matched cohorts inside the same store, and POS access at ticket level is a condition of every pilot. There is no attribution model to argue with.
Co-funding where it exists
In watches and automotive, brand and OEM co-op funds sales-process training. Part of the programme can sit outside your opex entirely, and we will help build that case before pricing is agreed.
The displacement
The mystery shopping math, worked plainly.
Substitute your own figures. If your programme is larger than this, the case gets easier rather than harder.
- Mystery shops per store, per month
- 2
- Typical cost per shop
- ≈ $90
- Per store, per month
- ≈ $180
- Per store, per year
- ≈ $2,160
Roughly $2,160 per store per year
That is what a sampled, delayed, low-coverage version of continuous conversation measurement currently costs you. Two staged visits a month, graded against a checklist, reported after the trading period they describe has ended.
The Gaincraft platform fee is designed to sit inside that number. The per-seat coaching licence sits in Learning, against a per-head budget you already run.
The displacement calculator is not gated and produces estimates from your inputs only.
In practice
What this changes in your approval process
The budget question stops being "what is this worth" and becomes "which of these two measurements do we want". You are already paying for quality assurance on the floor. The comparison is between twenty-four staged visits a year and every real conversation, at a cost that sits inside the number you already approved.
The approval path is shorter than it looks because there is no new line to create. Store Operations reallocates a vendor line it does not politically defend, and Learning reallocates a per-head figure it already spends.
The proof obligation sits with us rather than with your operations team. A pilot that cannot access POS at ticket level does not start, because a readout nobody can audit is worth nothing to you at renewal.
If the readout at day 90 does not justify the spend, that is what the readout will say. We would rather lose a renewal on an honest number than defend a bad programme for three years.
FAQ
What finance asks us
Send us your current quality assurance spend.
We will tell you whether the platform fee fits inside it at your door count, before anybody books a demo.