The Buynet Concept is designed to identify buyer needs and then evaluate how well supplier offers meet these needs in terms of product, service, price, and added-value.


The analytical process can be used to evaluate products ranging from a pin to a battleship, or services ranging from a wine waiter to a fully outsourced sales function. The evaluation of supplier offers is carried out using log templates that are tailored to the specific buying needs of each client. The logs break down the supplier offer into its smallest component parts and each part is scored using a weighted scoring system.

As an example, we were asked to consider the various merits of two competing contract publishing offers made to a Trade Association. Part of this process involved analysing print costs, which are notoriously difficult to compare on a like for like basis. The log broke the offer down into the following components:

Range of services

Added value services

Provision of service

Terms, conditions prices

Magazine (48pp)

Regional Newsletter

Reply Cards

Annual Report (24pp)

Advertising Revenue

Net cost

Reference sites


These components were broken down into a further 75 sub-components which considered length of proposed contract, production charges, delivery charges,
whether design, editorial,  and data management were included etc.

This established the Net Annual Cost of each offer and identified a staggering 100% cost difference between both offers, which was not readily discernible outside of the ‘small print’!


The result – our client was able to make an informed decision on which supplier to select and saved a potential £60k in the process!

Of course, price is not always the most important factor in any buying decision – that is why the Buynet analysis looks at the totality of the supplier offer including quality, service, lifetime costs and the like. In addition to comparative tables the process also results in the production of a “Better than Worse than” matrix where all aspects of the supplier offers are compared.

Better Than Worse Than Matrix (Extract)


Supplier 1

Supplier 2

Supplier 3

Approved sub contractor list

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Product enhancements/benefits

No

No

No

3rd Party accreditation

Yes

Yes

Yes

Product features

Score 80%

Score 80%

Score 80%

Product benefits

Score 60%

Score 60%

Score 60%

Warranty?

1 year warranty

1 year warranty

Not stated

Product flexibility - interchangeable?

Yes

Yes

Yes