Vendor Selection

Run The Processor RFP On One Defensible Basis.

From longlist to term sheet, Straata normalizes every proposal to one cost, contract, capability, and operating model the board can compare.

Eight-Vendor ECB Cross-SectionDe-identified / Illustrative
$0$2M$4M$6M$8M Vendor F$5.17M Vendor C$5.42MDEFENSIBLE ANSWER Vendor H$5.68M Vendor B$5.96M Vendor E$6.33M Vendor A$6.71M Vendor D$7.24M Vendor G$7.97M RANKED LOWEST TO HIGHEST EFFECTIVE COST BASISSELECTION ALSO SCORES TERMS, CAPABILITY, IMPLEMENTATION, AND OPERATING FIT $0$4M$8M Vendor F$5.17M Vendor C$5.42MDEFENSIBLE ANSWER Vendor H$5.68M Vendor B$5.96M Vendor E$6.33M Vendor A$6.71M Vendor D$7.24M Vendor G$7.97M RANKED BY EFFECTIVE COST BASISANSWER INCLUDES TERMS, CAPABILITY, IMPLEMENTATION, AND FIT

When every processor bid needs to answer the same question.

The Problem

A Gut Call Can Put Eight Figures Behind The Wrong Answer.

For CFOs, payments leaders, and product or operations teams choosing a first scaled processor or replacing one whose capabilities, technology, contract structure, or operating model no longer fit. Not for a sound incumbent where price and terms are the only gap, or for teams that already chose a processor and need the merchant-by-merchant move.

“We think another processor would be cheaper.”Board Exposure / Before Normalization
Unnormalized Bid RegisterBefore Effective Cost Basis
Bid APass-through plus markupAnnual rebateProvider managedNot Comparable
Bid BBundled rateGrowth creditSharedNot Comparable
Bid CSubscription plus basis pointsFee waiverPlatform ownedNot Comparable
Bid DBlended effective rateRamp incentiveContractedNot Comparable

Bids arrive in incomparable formats by design. The visible rate is only one part of the full-ramp economic answer.

Problem 01 / Economics

Proposals package pass-through, markup, minimums, and incentives differently, so headline rates cannot be compared.

Problem 02 / Operating Fit

Capability claims sit apart from integration effort, support obligations, risk, and contract terms.

Problem 03 / Governance

A preferred vendor emerges before finance and the board can see a defensible total-cost and fit model.

What You Get

The Decision Model Behind The Award.

Every bidder answers the same requirements and economic questions. Straata turns the responses into one decision model across cost, terms, capabilities, implementation, and operating fit, then carries the finalists to a board-ready recommendation and term sheet.

Vendor Selection Decision BookFour Work Products
Work Product 01

Normalized Cross-Section

One full-ramp Effective Cost Basis per vendor, ranked in dollars and tied back to proposal assumptions.

Vendor 01Full Ramp $
Vendor 02Full Ramp $
Vendor 03Full Ramp $
Work Product 02

Scored Questionnaire

Requirements and claims scored across the same capability, implementation, support, and risk framework.

CapabilitiesScored
ImplementationScored
Operating riskScored
Work Product 03

Finalist Negotiation

The short list is carried through economic, contract, support, and implementation diligence before the recommendation.

EconomicsOpening positionSharpened
TermsOpen issuesResolved
SupportGeneral promiseNamed
Work Product 04

Term Sheet

The selected economics and operating commitments are carried into a term sheet the board and counsel can use.

01Economics and ramp assumptions
02Risk and support ownership
03Implementation commitments
04Governance and contract path
01

Requirements, decision criteria, and stakeholder alignment

02

Market scan, longlist, and bidder outreach

03

Standardized RFP and proposal intake

04

Normalized economics and total-cost comparison

05

Capability, contract, implementation, and operating-risk scoring

06

Finalist diligence, recommendation, and term-sheet support

Scale Boundary

Stripe is still the right starting choice through the first hundred million or two of volume; this service exists for the scale where that stops being true.

How It Works

Seven Controlled Phases From Scope To Award.

Each phase closes one decision before the next begins, so criteria, economics, diligence, and negotiation stay tied to the same selection record.

Processor RFP Control RegisterSeven Phases
01
Scoping
Align stakeholders, requirements, decision criteria, data inputs, and bidder rules.
Scope Locked
02
Longlist
Scan the market, screen operating models, and invite the field that can meet the brief.
Bidders Invited
03
Questionnaire
Issue one requirements and proposal structure, then close gaps before evaluation.
Responses Complete
04
Evaluation
Normalize Effective Cost Basis and score capability, contract, implementation, and risk.
Field Scored
05
Shortlist
Resolve diligence gaps and identify the finalists that survive the complete decision model.
Finalists Approved
06
Finalist Negotiation
Sharpen economics, support, implementation commitments, contract terms, and risk ownership.
Term Sheets Ready
07
Award
Deliver the recommendation, decision record, and handoff into contracting and implementation.
Vendor Selected

Proof / Public-Safe And De-Identified

The Economic Stakes Are Material At Platform Scale.

Modeled means a quantified scenario. Executed means completed engagement work. Identified means a sized opportunity that has not yet been realized. Structural describes a market condition.

modeled $600K Annual Value Of One Basis Point

One basis point equaled $600K a year on a $6B platform.

executed $15B to $20B+ Aggregate Volume Placed Under RFP

Volume placed across completed selection engagements.

structural 4 to 8 weeks Migration Project Shape Today

Migration friction has collapsed: what was a 6 to 12 month threat is now a 4 to 8 week project.

What Goes Wrong Without A Controlled RFPPre-RFP Risk Register
Risk 01

Pre-RFP Defensive Amendments

A late concession moves the anchor before the market has produced a comparable alternative.

Risk 02

Incumbent Attention Drop

Service and escalation coverage weaken before the replacement decision is complete.

Risk 03

Board Pre-Selection

A preferred name forms before criteria, weighting, economics, and operating fit are visible together.

Risk 04

Two-Vendor Compression

The field narrows too early, reducing leverage and hiding alternatives that fit the operating model better.

executed

A de-identified field-service SaaS engagement records that a processor was selected, beta completed, and the replacement payments program launched live. The case asserts no savings amount. It supports experience carrying a selection through launch, not a claim that Vendor Selection alone caused a quantified result.

Fit Check

Use Vendor Selection When The Processor Itself Must Change.

Best For: Platforms replacing an incumbent or selecting a first scaled payments partner. Choose This When: Processor fit, capabilities, or operating risk are wrong, not merely price.

Engagement Fit And Routing RegisterChoose The Right Motion
Processor Must ChangeVendor Selection
Trigger

Replace the incumbent.

Motion

Run a full RFP.

What You Leave With

A term sheet from a ranked field.

Incumbent Still FitsContract Negotiation
Trigger

Re-tune the incumbent.

Motion

Run a renegotiation.

What You Leave With

Reset economics on current rails.

Processor Already Chosen

A book already committed to a processor goes to Managed Vendor Migration .

What Happens Next

Start The Selection With A Scoped Longlist.

The first call scopes the decision, confirms the incumbent should be replaced, and identifies the inputs needed to build the longlist and Effective Cost Basis.