# Pricing worksheet: the net-90 premium calculator

Use this worksheet on every enterprise-shaped deal before you send a proposal. It produces two numbers, kept as two separate line items, never folded into your base rate.

## Your anchor line (set once, reused on every proposal)

Your standard terms: **net 15** (change this if your own default is different, then use your own number everywhere "net 15" appears below).

Anchor sentence for the top of every proposal, enterprise or not:

> Our standard terms are net 15 from invoice date. For procurement cycles that require longer terms, see the payment schedule in section [X], which is priced to reflect the extended float.

This line goes on the proposal by default, before you know whether this client will ask for longer terms. It sets net 15 as the normal case and makes any extension something procurement has to request, not something you offer first.

## Line item A: compliance and questionnaire hours

| Input | Where it comes from | Your number |
|---|---|---|
| Total questions on the questionnaire | Count them directly | ____ |
| Questions already answered in the answer bank | Your running answer bank | ____ |
| New questions (total minus bank-answered) | Subtract | ____ |
| Hours per bank-answered question | Your own estimate (usually 0.1-0.25 hr: copy, adapt, confirm still accurate) | ____ |
| Hours per new question | Your own estimate (usually 0.5-1.5 hr: research the real answer, confirm it with yourself or whoever owns that fact, write it, then bank it) | ____ |
| Review and formatting pass | A flat block, usually 1-3 hours regardless of question count | ____ |
| **Total compliance hours** | Sum of the above | ____ |
| Your fully loaded rate | What an hour of your time actually costs the business, not your invoice rate alone | $____ /hr |
| **Line item A total** | Hours x rate | $____ |

Do not flatten this to an average "questionnaires take about a day" number. A 40-question questionnaire where 35 questions are already banked costs you almost nothing. A 40-question questionnaire where 30 are new costs you a real week. Price the deal you actually have.

## Line item B: financing surcharge for the payment-term gap

The surcharge scales with how far the client's stated terms sit past your net-15 anchor. It is compensation for the cash you are floating the client, priced the same way a bank prices a loan: as a percentage of the amount outstanding for the time it is outstanding.

| Input | Your number |
|---|---|
| Deal size (total fee) | $____ |
| Client's stated payment term (days) | ____ |
| Your anchor term (days, usually 15) | ____ |
| Gap (stated term minus anchor) | ____ days |
| Your cost-of-float rate (annualized; a reasonable starting point is your own cost of capital, or 12-18% per year if you are not sure) | ____% / year |
| Daily rate | Annual rate / 365 | ____% / day |
| **Line item B total** | Deal size x daily rate x gap days | $____ |

Worked arithmetic, for a $40,000 deal at net 90 against a net-15 anchor, using 15% annualized:

- Gap: 90 - 15 = 75 days
- Daily rate: 15% / 365 = 0.0411%/day
- Surcharge: $40,000 x 0.000411 x 75 = **$1,232**

Round to a clean number for the proposal ($1,200 or $1,250) rather than presenting a figure with false precision.

## Putting it on the proposal

Show both lines, labeled plainly, next to your base fee:

```
Base engagement fee ................... $X
Compliance and security review ........ $A   (questionnaire: NN questions, NN new)
Payment-term financing surcharge ...... $B   (net 90 vs. our standard net 15)
-----------------------------------------------
Total .................................. $X + A + B
```

A procurement team that already works with RFPs reads line items like these as normal practice. Hiding A and B inside the base fee is what reads as a padded number when someone eventually asks what it covers.

## Before you price the full premium, ask the one question that can shrink it

Confirm directly with your contact whether the stated term is actually fixed for a deal this size, or whether it is a default that smaller deals can get waived. Many procurement processes apply net-90 as a blanket policy but will approve net-30 or net-45 for a deal under their size threshold, if someone asks before the paperwork is final (references/sources.md documents this pattern). Ask before you compute line item B, while the number is still easy to change.

# Security questionnaire answer bank

A running library of answers to the questions that recur across vendor security and risk questionnaires. Build it once in Phase 1, step 2, and add to it every time Phase 2, step 13 closes out a deal. The goal: each new questionnaire starts from answers you have already confirmed instead of from zero.

## Columns

| Column | What it holds |
|---|---|
| Question category | One of: data handling, subprocessors, encryption, incident response, access control, backups, insurance, other |
| Question (as typically phrased) | The recurring question, in the wording you see most often |
| Your confirmed answer | The actual, current, accurate answer for this business |
| Confidence | Confirmed (the owner has checked this is still accurate) or needs owner input (no accurate answer exists yet) |
| Last confirmed | Date the owner last checked this answer still holds |
| Source deal | The first deal where this question appeared, for traceability |

## Starter sheet (copy into a spreadsheet)

```csv
category,question,answer,confidence,last_confirmed,source_deal
data_handling,"How is customer data encrypted at rest and in transit?",,needs owner input,,
subprocessors,"List all subprocessors with access to customer data.",,needs owner input,,
encryption,"What encryption standard is used for data in transit?",,needs owner input,,
incident_response,"Describe your incident response process and notification timeline.",,needs owner input,,
access_control,"How is access to production systems restricted and reviewed?",,needs owner input,,
backups,"What is your backup frequency and retention policy?",,needs owner input,,
insurance,"Do you carry cyber liability or errors and omissions insurance?",,needs owner input,,
```

Rows above are the seven categories named in Phase 1, step 2. Replace the blank answer and confidence cells with your business's real answers as you confirm each one. Never fill a row with a plausible-sounding answer the business cannot actually back up.

## Using the bank in Phase 2

When a new questionnaire arrives (step 7), check each question against this bank first:

1. A question that matches a confirmed row: reuse that answer, adapted to the new questionnaire's exact wording. This is the fast path, usually 0.1 to 0.25 hours per question.
2. A question with no matching row, or a row still marked "needs owner input": this is new work. Research the real answer, confirm it with the owner (never invent a certification, control, or policy the business does not have), write it, and add it to the bank as a new confirmed row. This is the slow path, usually 0.5 to 1.5 hours per question.
3. A question that matches a row marked "needs owner input" from a previous deal: treat it the same as new work until the owner actually supplies an answer. Do not reuse a "needs owner input" marker as if it were a confirmed answer.

Add every new question-and-answer pair back into the bank before closing out the deal (step 13). The bank should get faster to clear with every deal.

## Keeping the bank accurate

Review the bank on the same cadence as the tracker review in Phase 3. A policy, a certification, or a vendor relationship can change; an answer that was accurate six months ago can become false. Update the "last confirmed" date whenever the owner re-checks an answer, and pull any row the owner can no longer stand behind back to "needs owner input" until it is re-confirmed.

# Payment structure templates

Four invoice structures for enterprise-shaped deals. Pick one per deal, at proposal stage, before signature. The structure is part of what the client approves, not a renegotiation you raise after work starts.

## Template A: deposit (default for a single-invoice project)

50% of the total fee due at signature. The remaining 50% at delivery or at a fixed date, whichever comes first.

```
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
At signature .......................... 50%  ($____)
At delivery (or [date], whichever is first) 50%  ($____)
```

Use this when the engagement is a single deliverable with a clear end point: a project, a build, a one-time engagement. It is your default unless the deal shape calls for B, C, or D below.

## Template B: fixed calendar (for retainers and multi-invoice engagements)

A schedule tied to the calendar, not to the client's internal milestones. A delay in the client's approvals does not push your payment date.

```
PAYMENT SCHEDULE (fixed calendar)
At signature ........................... 20%  ($____)
Day 30 .................................. 20%  ($____)
Day 60 .................................. 30%  ($____)
Day 90 .................................. 30%  ($____)
```

Adjust the split to fit the deal (equal quarters also work: 25/25/25/25). The exact split matters less than the fact that every date is a calendar date agreed at signature. The client's own process cannot stall it the way a milestone-based schedule can.

Cover letter language:

> Invoices are issued on the dates above regardless of project milestones. If a milestone shifts, we will discuss scope, but the payment calendar stays fixed.

## Template C: paid discovery (for a new enterprise prospect, before any scoping work)

A short, fixed-fee discovery or diagnostic phase, invoiced in full at signature, before you do any real scoping. This does two things at once: it gets cash in the door early, and it screens out a prospect who will not commit real money before you have proven anything.

```
PHASE 1: DISCOVERY (fixed fee, invoiced in full at signature)
Scope: [audit / diagnostic / requirements review], delivered as [a short written report / a scoped proposal for phase 2]
Fee: $____, due 100% at signature
Duration: [1-2 weeks]

PHASE 2: full engagement
Priced and scheduled separately, based on what phase 1 finds. Not committed to at signature.
```

Proposal language:

> Before scoping the full engagement, we run a short discovery phase. It's a fixed fee, paid in full up front, and it produces [the deliverable]. From there we'll have a clear, accurate quote for phase 2, instead of guessing at scope today.

A prospect who balks at paying for discovery before any commitment to the larger deal is telling you something useful about how the rest of the relationship will go.

## Template D: under-threshold invoicing (only when a no-PO threshold exists)

Some procurement processes let a buyer approve a purchase under a stated dollar threshold without a formal purchase order or a signature cycle. If the client mentions a threshold like this, check whether structuring your first invoice just under it lets the engagement start without waiting on the client's own approval chain.

```
Check before using this template:
[ ] Client has confirmed a no-PO or no-signature threshold, and named the number
[ ] Structuring invoice 1 under that threshold is honest and fits real scope (never split a job artificially just to dodge review; split only where the phases are genuinely separable, e.g. Template C's discovery phase)
[ ] The owner has reviewed this option and chosen to use it for this deal, only if the real fee genuinely fits under the threshold
```

This is not a universal move. It only applies when the client's own process has a real threshold and the first phase of work is genuinely sized to fit under it. Flag it to the owner as an option; do not assume it applies by default.

## Choosing between them

| Deal shape | Template |
|---|---|
| Single project, clear end date | A |
| Retainer or multi-invoice engagement | B |
| New enterprise prospect, no track record together yet | C |
| Client has a confirmed no-PO threshold | D (combine with A, B, or C for the rest) |

A and C can combine: paid discovery (C) followed by a deposit-based engagement (A) once phase 2 is scoped.

# Days-to-pay tracker and the three-strike walk-away rule

Build this once. Update it every time an enterprise-shaped invoice gets paid. Review it on a recurring cadence (monthly is reasonable), not just when a new deal comes in.

## Tracker columns

| Column | What it holds |
|---|---|
| Client name | |
| Deal size | Total fee for this engagement |
| Stated payment terms | What the contract says (net 15, net 30, net 60, net 90...) |
| Long-terms flag | Yes/No: is the stated term net 60 or longer |
| Questionnaire hours logged | From the pricing worksheet, if a questionnaire existed |
| Invoice sent date | |
| Invoice paid date | |
| Actual days-to-pay | Paid date minus sent date, in days |
| Gap vs. stated term | Actual days-to-pay minus stated terms (positive = paid later than even the long stated term promised) |

## Starter sheet (copy into a spreadsheet)

```csv
client,deal_size,stated_terms_days,long_terms_flag,questionnaire_hours,invoice_sent,invoice_paid,actual_days_to_pay,gap_vs_stated
Example Corp,40000,90,Yes,14,2026-01-10,2026-04-02,82,-8
Sample Industries,18000,60,Yes,4,2026-02-01,2026-05-05,93,33
,,,,,,,,
```

Rows above are illustrative placeholders to show the shape of the sheet; replace them with your own clients before using it.

## Reading the sheet

- A negative "gap vs. stated" (paid faster than the stated term) is a good client, regardless of how long their stated term was. The stated term was only a negotiating position; the actual days-to-pay is the lived number that matters.
- A positive gap, especially a large and repeated one, is the real signal. A client who agrees to net 60 and then actually pays in 93 days behaves like a net-90-or-worse client, regardless of the shorter number written on paper.
- Track the trend per client across multiple invoices, not just one data point. One slow payment can be a fluke (an internal approver was on leave). A pattern across 3 or more invoices from the same client is a trend worth acting on.

## The three-strike rule

A client trips the walk-away flag when **three separate invoices from that same client**, within a trailing 12-month window, each show an actual days-to-pay that exceeds the stated term by 15 days or more.

```
Strike check (run per client, every review cycle):
1. Pull all invoices for this client in the trailing 12 months.
2. For each, compute gap_vs_stated = actual_days_to_pay - stated_terms_days.
3. Count invoices where gap_vs_stated >= 15.
4. If that count is 3 or more: this client has tripped the walk-away flag.
```

Adjust the 15-day threshold and the "three" count to your own risk tolerance; what matters is tracking a pattern across multiple invoices over time, not reacting to any single one.

## What tripping the flag means

Tripping the flag forces a required decision point for the owner. Nothing about the relationship changes automatically:

1. Bring the client's full gap history to the next renewal or new-SOW conversation.
2. Offer one more cycle, but only with a structural change: move them to Template C (paid discovery) or Template D (under-threshold invoicing) for every future engagement, or require a deposit percentage higher than your standard.
3. If the client declines the structural change, or if a fourth invoice repeats the same gap after the change, the recommendation is to walk away from new work with this client. Existing signed work still gets delivered; new SOWs do not get offered.

Recording the flag and the decision in the tracker (a simple "flag tripped, decision: [kept with new terms / declined further work], date" note next to the client's rows) means the next review cycle does not have to re-litigate a decision already made.

## Review cadence

Run the strike check on every client with 2 or more invoices in the tracker, at least once a month, independent of whether a new deal is on the table. A client can quietly cross the three-strike line between deals. The monthly pass catches that early, before the next proposal is already being drafted.

# Financing bridge: decision table

Use this only after you have already applied a payment-structure template (see payment-structure-templates.md) and the gap between signature and your first real cash milestone still outruns what the business can absorb. Use this only as a backstop for the gap that remains after you have already set good terms.

## Active provider

Record the owner's chosen invoice-financing provider here, once, during setup:

```
Active provider: ____________________
Typical fee range quoted to us: ____% per invoice (or ____% per 30 days outstanding)
Minimum invoice size they'll finance: $____
Contact / account reference: ____________________
Decided by owner on: __________ (date)
```

Leave this blank, and do not name a provider in any live deal conversation, until the owner has filled it in. This is a one-time decision that belongs to the owner.

## Comparing the options

| Option | What it costs | How fast you get cash | Best fit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wait it out (no financing) | $0 in fees, but the full float cost is carried as opportunity cost on your own cash | Cash arrives on the client's actual pay date | The gap is small enough, or your buffer is large enough, that carrying it costs less than any financing fee would |
| Invoice financing on this invoice | A one-time fee, usually 1-4% of the invoice per 30 days outstanding, taken against this specific invoice (references/sources.md) | Days, once the invoice is approved | The gap is real, but this is a one-off deal rather than a recurring pattern |
| A standing line of credit | Ongoing interest on whatever is drawn, plus often a commitment fee whether or not you draw | Immediate, once the line exists | You are seeing this gap across several clients, not just one, and want standing capacity rather than financing one invoice at a time |

## Running the numbers before offering it

```
Invoice amount: $____
Gap (days between invoice sent and client's realistic pay date): ____
Financing fee quoted: ____% 
Financing fee in dollars: invoice amount x fee% = $____
Cost of simply waiting (using the same cost-of-float rate from the pricing worksheet): $____
```

Show both numbers to the owner side by side. If the financing fee is close to or larger than the cost of just waiting, waiting is usually the better call; financing wins only when the business genuinely cannot carry the float until the client pays.

## How to present it, if it's offered

Present financing as tied to this one invoice each time you offer it:

> We can get this invoice financed through [provider] for a fee of about $____, which gets the cash to us in days instead of in [gap] days. The alternative is carrying the float ourselves, which costs us roughly $____ in opportunity cost over the same period. Your call on which one we use for this deal.

Let the owner decide per deal. A pattern of using the bridge on every enterprise deal is itself a signal worth feeding back into the walk-away tracker: it usually means the underlying payment terms need to get better before the bridge becomes a permanent crutch.

# Sources

Every figure and sourced claim used in this skill, with where it comes from and a confidence flag. The guardrail in the main skill ("never state a figure in a client-facing document that is not recorded here") checks against this file. An entry flagged secondary or unconfirmed should never be presented to a client as independently verified.

## External sources

| Source | What it supports | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Advance Partners, "Net 30 vs. Net 60 vs. Net 90: How Payment Terms Impact Staffing Agency Growth" | General industry framing: shorter stated terms (net 15 to net 30) are typical for small-business standard terms, while net 60 and longer are more common with larger enterprise clients. Used as background for the net-15 anchor default in the pricing worksheet. | Secondary. Industry-typical framing, not a guarantee for any specific client. |
| JPMorgan Chase Institute, "Cash Flows, Balances, and Buffer Days" | The underlying logic for tracking a cash buffer against payment-term gaps, and for pricing a financing surcharge scaled to the gap between a client's stated terms and the business's own standard terms. | Primary for the buffer-days concept. The specific annualized cost-of-float rate used in the worksheet (12 to 18 percent, or the owner's own cost of capital) is an owner-set default, not drawn from this report. |
| Vanta, "Zero-Touch Assessments: The Future of Security Reviews" | Background for treating security and vendor-risk questionnaires as a recurring, systematizable cost rather than a one-off task, which is the basis for the answer bank in references/questionnaire-answer-bank.md. | Secondary. Supports the general approach, not any specific hour estimate. |
| Resolve Pay, "Better Than Factoring" | The invoice-financing fee ranges used in references/financing-comparison.md (roughly 1 to 4 percent of the invoice per 30 days outstanding) and the framing of invoice financing as tied to a single invoice rather than a standing line of credit. | Secondary. Actual fees vary by provider and are confirmed with the owner's chosen provider (Phase 1, step 4) before being used in a client-facing number. |
| Sakas & Company, "Negotiating Payment Terms" | The pattern behind Phase 2, step 6: procurement processes that apply a long payment term as a blanket policy sometimes approve shorter terms for a deal under their size threshold, if asked before the paperwork is final. | Secondary. A documented negotiating pattern, not a guarantee for any specific procurement process. |
| Association of National Advertisers (ANA), payment-terms report | General context for net-60-or-longer terms becoming more common in large-company vendor relationships, which is the basis for treating this as a recurring, systemic issue worth a standing protocol rather than a one-off negotiation. | Secondary. Industry-wide context, not a client-specific figure. |

## Operational defaults (not external statistics)

These numbers are the skill's own settings, chosen by the owner, not statistics drawn from an outside study. They are listed here for transparency, not presented to a client as independently verified research.

| Default | Value | Set in |
|---|---|---|
| Standard-terms anchor | Net 15, unless the owner sets a different default | Phase 1, step 3 |
| Cost-of-float rate | 12 to 18 percent annualized, or the owner's own cost of capital | references/pricing-worksheet.md |
| Walk-away threshold | 3 separate clients with net-60-or-longer stated terms, tracked over a trailing 12-month window | references/walkaway-tracker.md |
| Single-client slow-pay flag | 15 or more days past that client's own stated terms, on any invoice | references/walkaway-tracker.md |
| Review cadence | Monthly, unless the owner sets a different cadence | Phase 3 |

## Rule for any new figure

Before stating a figure in a proposal, a filled questionnaire, or any other client-facing document, check it against this file. If it is not here, either add it (with its source and confidence flag) or do not state it as a verified fact. A figure flagged secondary or unconfirmed above is presented, if at all, as the business's own estimate, never as independently verified research.

# Worked example: a net-90 enterprise proposal, premium itemized

Illustrative numbers throughout. Replace every figure with your own deal's real numbers before using this as a template.

## The deal

- Prospect: a mid-size enterprise buyer running a formal vendor-onboarding process
- Total scoped fee: $48,000
- Prospect's procurement process: a 55-question security questionnaire, legal review, and stated payment terms of net 90
- Your standard terms: net 15
- Your fully loaded rate: $150/hr
- Your cost-of-float rate: 15% annualized

## Step-by-step, following the pricing worksheet

**Questionnaire hours (line item A).** Of the 55 questions, 38 are already in the answer bank (0.15 hr each to adapt and confirm) and 17 are new (0.75 hr each to research, confirm, write, and bank). Add a 2-hour review and formatting pass.

```
38 x 0.15 = 5.7 hr
17 x 0.75 = 12.75 hr
Review pass = 2 hr
Total = 20.45 hr, rounded to 20.5 hr
20.5 hr x $150/hr = $3,075
```

**Financing surcharge (line item B).** Gap is 90 - 15 = 75 days.

```
Daily rate: 15% / 365 = 0.0411%/day
$48,000 x 0.000411 x 75 = $1,479
Rounded for the proposal: $1,500
```

**Before finalizing, the deal-size check (worksheet step).** You ask the procurement contact directly whether net-30 or net-45 is available for a deal under $50,000. The answer comes back: no, net 90 is policy regardless of size for this vendor category. The full premium stands.

## The proposal line items as the client sees them

```
Base engagement fee ..................................... $48,000
Compliance and security questionnaire review ............ $3,075   (55 questions, 17 new)
Payment-term financing surcharge ........................ $1,500   (net 90 vs. our standard net 15)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total .................................................... $52,575
```

## Payment structure chosen

This is a new prospect with no track record, and the deal is a single scoped engagement rather than a retainer, so Template C (paid discovery) runs first, followed by Template A (deposit) for the main engagement:

```
PHASE 1: DISCOVERY (fixed fee, invoiced in full at signature)
Scope: current-state audit and requirements confirmation, delivered as a written scoping report
Fee: $4,500, due 100% at signature
Duration: 2 weeks

PHASE 2: full engagement (priced above, scoped once phase 1 completes)
At signature of phase 2 ................................. 50%  ($26,287.50)
At delivery .............................................. 50%  ($26,287.50)
```

## Financing bridge: not used in this example

Checked against the financing-comparison table: the phase 1 discovery fee arrives at signature, and the phase 2 deposit arrives before most of the work starts, so the real cash gap left exposed is small relative to the business's buffer. The owner reviewed the numbers and chose to carry this one without a financing bridge. (On a larger deal, or a thinner cash month, the same check might land on using the bridge instead; run the comparison every time, do not assume the answer from one deal carries to the next.)

## What goes in the tracker once this deal is live

```
client,deal_size,stated_terms_days,long_terms_flag,questionnaire_hours,invoice_sent,invoice_paid,actual_days_to_pay,gap_vs_stated
Example Enterprise Co,52575,90,Yes,20.5,,,,
```

The sent/paid/actual columns stay blank until the first invoice is actually sent and paid. Fill them in as the deal progresses, not in advance.

## Before anything goes to the client

Per the proposal, this itemized package (compliance premium, financing surcharge, chosen payment structure) goes to the owner for explicit approval first. Nothing here is sent, emailed, or submitted to the client until that approval is given in the same conversation it was requested in.

Log the actual question count and estimate the hours to answer them using your answer bank; a question you've never answered before takes far longer than one you have a stock answer for. Price those hours as their own line item in the proposal, separate from your base rate.

Not automatically. Check your real cash buffer against the gap between when you'll pay your own costs and when the invoice clears. If the gap outruns your buffer, either price a financing surcharge and a bridge option into the deal, or decline it.

Keep it as its own visible line, scaled to how far the client's stated terms sit past your own standard terms. Folding it silently into the base rate hides the real cost from the client's own procurement team. A named line item is usually easier for procurement to approve than an unexplained increase to your base fee.

Ask directly whether a smaller deal size qualifies for net 30 or net 45. Many procurement processes apply net-90 as a blanket policy but approve shorter terms for a deal under their size threshold, if someone asks before the paperwork is final (references/sources.md). If the term really is fixed, the premium and the invoice restructuring apply in full.

Log actual days-to-pay against stated terms for every client in one place. When your third client with net-60-or-longer terms shows up, the skill recommends you stop taking deals like that going forward. Separately, any client paying 15 or more days past their own stated terms gets flagged on its own, regardless of that count.

Use a fixed calendar instead of milestone billing: for example 20% at signature, then equal installments at day 30, 60, and 90. A fixed calendar means a slip in one deliverable doesn't also delay your next payment.